Chikhladze v. Tsulukiani
- Laura Swain
- 1:25-cv-07144
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Chikhladze v. Tsulukiani, Judge Swain recognized voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a), closed the case, and denied fee-free appeal status.
The action brought by Simon Chikhladze against Tea Tsulukiani and the other named defendants was voluntarily dismissed, pending applications were terminated, and the case was closed; the defendants had not been served or appeared.
What happened
In Simon Chikhladze v. Tea Tsulukiani, et al., Chikhladze notified the court that he was withdrawing the action with prejudice. The defendants had not been served and had not appeared.
Judge Swain explained that a plaintiff may voluntarily end a case without court permission when the opposing party has not served an answer or summary-judgment motion. The court therefore treated the action as voluntarily dismissed under Rule 41(a) and directed the Clerk to close the case and terminate pending applications.
Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for any appeal. The court did not decide whether the dismissal’s effect was with or without prejudice.
The detailed version
- Chikhladze v. Tsulukiani · No. 1:25-cv-07144
- Laura Swain
- Oct. 9, 2025
Background
Simon Chikhladze submitted a notice stating that he withdrew this action with prejudice. The opinion states that the defendants had not been served and had not appeared.
Court’s Analysis
The court applied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a), which allows a plaintiff to voluntarily dismiss an action without a court order by filing a notice before the opposing party serves an answer or a motion for summary judgment, or by filing a stipulation signed by all parties who have appeared. Because the defendants had not been served or appeared, the court concluded that Chikhladze did not need the court’s permission to dismiss the action.
The court noted that a voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a) is generally without prejudice, but that a notice can operate as an adjudication on the merits if the plaintiff previously dismissed a federal or state action based on or including the same claim. The court said Chikhladze appeared to have previously dismissed with prejudice actions against the same defendants arising from the same facts. It expressly stated that it did not need to decide that issue.
Disposition
Based on Chikhladze’s notice, Chief Judge Laura Taylor Swain ordered that the action was voluntarily dismissed under Rule 41(a). The Clerk was directed to terminate pending applications and close the case. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The opinion does not separately state that the court itself dismissed the action with prejudice.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.