Clark v. Benoit ( 2022 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS TEXARKANA DIVISION SHEILA CLARK, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Timothy Clark, Deceased PLAINTIFF v. Case No. 4:21-cv-4008 RUSTON BENOIT and SABINE RIVER FORD DEFENDANTS ORDER Before the Court is the parties’ Rule 41 Stipulation of Dismissal With Prejudice. (ECF No. 36). No response is necessary. The parties have settled this case and stipulate to the dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims with prejudice, with each side bearing their own fees and costs. An action may be dismissed by “a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). The “entry of such a stipulation of dismissal is effective automatically and does not require judicial approval.” Gardiner v. A.H. Robins Co., 747 F.2d 1180, 1189 (8th Cir. 1984). The instant stipulation of dismissal is signed by all parties. Thus, Plaintiff’s claims were effectively dismissed when the stipulation was filed. However, this order issues for purposes of maintaining the docket. To the extent that the instant stipulation (ECF No. 36) constitutes a motion, it is GRANTED. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, with the parties bearing their own fees and costs. If any party desires that the terms of settlement be a part of the record therein, those terms should be reduced to writing and filed with the Court within thirty days of the entry of this judgment. The Court retains jurisdiction to vacate this order upon cause shown that the settlement has not been completed and further litigation is necessary. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 27th day of July, 2022. /s/ Susan O. Hickey Susan O. Hickey Chief United States District Judge