Santiesteban

(PC) Hodge v. Santiesteban

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 9, 20201:19-cv-00341California349 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARK A. HODGE, ) Case No.: 1:19-cv-00341-NONE-SAB (PC) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO v. ) CLOSE ACTION PURSUANT TO THE PARTIES’

STIPLUATION TO VOLUNTARY DISMISS THE

C. SANTIESTEBAN, et.al., ) ACTION ) Defendants. ) (ECF No. 43) ) ) ) )

Plaintiff Mark A. Hodge is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 8, 2020, the parties filed a stipulation to dismiss this action, with prejudice, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (ECF No. 43.) Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) provides in pertinent part that “the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing . . . a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.” A voluntary stipulation to dismiss an action pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) automatically…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.