TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Donald O. Shaffer v. James Evans

Donald O. SHAFFER, Appellant, v. James EVANS, Appellee

Shaffer v. Evans, 263 F.2d 134 (10th Cir. 1958)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
December 29, 1958
Docket
No. 5955
Judges
Lewis, Murrah, Per Curiam, Phillips
Citations
263 F.2d 1342 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 6781958 U.S. App. LEXIS 6111

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff appeals from an order of the trial court dismissing his suit with prejudice when he declined to proceed further upon the court's denying his motion to dismiss the action without prejudice after the defendant had filed an answer. The sole contention on appeal is that the court erred in denying the motion to dismiss the suit without prejudice.

In the interest of protecting the rights of all the parties and accomplishing expeditious disposition of litigation, a motion by the plaintiff to dismiss after service of the defendant’s answer or motion for summary judgment is addressed to the sound judicial discretion of the court. Rule 41(a) (2) F.R.Civ.P. Butler v. Denton, 10 Cir., 150 F.2d 687 ; Grivas v. Parmelee Transp. Co., 7 Cir., 207 F.2d 334 ; Larsen v. Switzer, 8 Cir., 183 F.2d 850 ; Federal Savings & Loan Ins. Corp. v. Reeves, 8 Cir., 148 F.2d 731 .

This action had been pending for some six months at the time of the hearing on the plaintiff’s motion to dismiss. Depositions had been taken, the defendant had made arrangements for medical testimony, and a pre-trial conference had been held. The case had not been set down for trial, but apparently was ready for trial at the next jury term. Requiring the plaintiff to proceed under those circumstances in the court in which he had filed his action could hardly be termed arbitrary. Certainly, no reason prejudicial to his substantive rights was suggested for dismissal, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion.

The judgment is affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

Cited by 15 cases

View all citing references →
1961: 11962: 11964: 11973: 21974: 21977: 11980: 21984: 11987: 11988: 11989: 11990: 119612026peak 1973 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Robert H. Gravatt v. Columbia University845 F.2d 54 (2d Cir. 1988)
  2. Shepherd v. Delta Medical Center502 So. 2d 1188 (Miss. 1987)
  3. Alamance Industries, Inc. v. Filene's291 F.2d 142 (1st Cir. 1961)
  4. Willard Dairy Corporation v. National Dairy Products Corporation and Sealtest, Inc.309 F.2d 943 (6th Cir. 1962)
  5. United States v. Wyoming National Bank Of Casper505 F.2d 1064 (10th Cir. 1974)
  6. Dobson v. Crews164 So. 2d 252 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1964)

Most recent

  1. Holbrook v. Andersen Corp.130 F.R.D. 516 (D. Me. 1990)
  2. Helmer g. Brandano875 F.2d 318 (9th Cir. 1989)
  3. Robert H. Gravatt v. Columbia University845 F.2d 54 (2d Cir. 1988)
  4. Shepherd v. Delta Medical Center502 So. 2d 1188 (Miss. 1987)
  5. Chorn v. United States4 Cl. Ct. 666 (Ct. Cl. 1984)
  6. Spencer v. Moore Business Forms, Inc.87 F.R.D. 118 (N.D. Ga. 1980)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
Grivas v. Parmelee Transp. Co., 207 F.2d 334 (7th Cir. 1953) 36
Butler v. Denton, 150 F.2d 687 (10th Cir. 1945) 30
Larsen v. Switzer, Judge of the United States Dist. Court, 183 F.2d 850 (8th Cir. 1950) 17
Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. v. Reeves, 148 F.2d 731 (8th Cir. 1945) 14

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list