Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Freidin Brown
-
Order | Filed: April 05, 2024 | Entered: April 05, 2024 Octagon Towers Condominium Association, Inc. v. Lexington Insurance Company
Insurance | Florida Southern
Order Dismissing/Closing Case or Party
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Plaintiff's Notice of Voluntary Dismissal without Prejudice Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). 38 . Rule 41(a)(1)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows a plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss a claim prior to a defendant's filing of an answer or a motion for summary judgment, or after an answer has been filed where the dismissal bears the signatures of both parties. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). In this case, neither an answer nor a motion for summary judgment has been filed. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Notice, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the above-styled cause is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. All pending motions, if any, are DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 4/5/2024. (mh02)
-
Notice | Filed: April 05, 2024 | Entered: April 05, 2024 Octagon Towers Condominium Association, Inc. v. Lexington Insurance Company
Insurance | Florida Southern
Notice of Voluntary Dismissal - aty
NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal Without Prejudice by Octagon Towers Condominium Association, Inc. (Odess, Susan)
-
Order | Filed: April 05, 2024 | Entered: April 05, 2024 Octagon Towers Condominium Association, Inc. v. Lexington Insurance Company
Insurance | Florida Southern
Order on Motion to Stay
PAPERLESS ORDER. THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Defendant's Unopposed Motion to Stay Pending Ruling on Motion to Dismiss. 21 . Therein, Defendant requests that the Court enter an order "staying discovery in this matter and suspending related deadlines" pending the Court's ruling on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss 6 . Id. at 1. In support of this request, Defendant asserts that the Motion to Dismiss is meritorious because "Plaintiff's factual allegations fall squarely within the policy exclusion," and "[i]f granted, [Defendant's] pending Motion to Dismiss will fully dispose of the instant lawsuit." Id. at 3, 5. Defendant further contends that "[i]f this matter is not stayed, the parties will incur significant discovery costs for depositions and non-party discovery over the next several weeks." Id. at 1. Plaintiff does not oppose the relief requested. Id. at 6.
The Eleventh Circuit has stated that "[i]f the district court dismisses a nonmeritorious claim before discovery has begun, unnecessary costs to the litigants and to the court system can be avoided. Conversely, delaying ruling on a motion to dismiss such a claim until after the parties complete discovery encourages abusive discovery and, if the court ultimately dismisses the claim, imposes unnecessary costs. For these reasons, any legally unsupported claim that would unduly enlarge the scope of discovery should be eliminated before the discovery stage, if possible." Chudasama v. Mazda Motor Corp., 123 F.3d 1353, 1368 (11th Cir. 1997). A court may issue a stay of discovery pending the resolution of a motion where "resolution of the motion will dispose of the entire case." Dayem v. Chavez, No. 13-62405-CIV, 2014 WL 12588513, at *1 (S.D. Fla. Mar. 11, 2014) (citation omitted). "To evaluate whether there is a strong likelihood 'the [dismissal] motion will be granted and entirely eliminate the need for such discovery,' the district court must take a 'preliminary peek' at the merits of the motion." Id. (quoting Feldman v. Flood, 176 F.R.D. 651, 65253 (M.D. Fla. 1997)).
Here, upon a "preliminary peek" of the Motion to Dismiss 6 , the Court finds that there is a strong likelihood that it will fully dispose of the claims in this case. Thus, a stay is warranted. Dayem, 2014 WL 12588513, at *1. Further, the interests of preventing unnecessary costs relating to discovery weighs in favor of granting a stay. Chudasama, 123 F.3d at 1368. Accordingly, UPON CONSIDERATION of the Motion, the pertinent portions of the record, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion 21 is GRANTED. Discovery, pretrial, and trial deadlines are hereby STAYED pending a ruling on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss 6 . Signed by Judge K. Michael Moore on 4/5/2024. (mh02)
Stay ahead of the curve
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
- Archive of over 450,000 articles
- Database of over 2.1 million cases
- 62,000+ organization-specific pages.
- Daily and real-time news and case alerts on organizations, industries, and customized search queries.
- Significant legal events involving law firms, companies, industries, and government agencies.
- Learn more
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login