Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 20, 2023

Karsjens v. McCauley

Judge
Donovan Frank
Docket
0:15-cv-02590
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro SeMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Karsjens v. Gross, Judge Frank granted Karsjens’s request to end the case without prejudice and denied Gross’s dismissal motion as moot.

Who this affects

Kevin Scott Karsjens’s claims against Jenn Gross were dismissed without prejudice, while Gross’s motion to dismiss was denied as moot. Claims against Dana Osborne and Thorne Torgerson had already been dismissed without prejudice.

What happened

Kevin Scott Karsjens, representing himself, asked to dismiss the case entirely without prejudice. Claims against Dana Osborne and Thorne Torgerson had already been dismissed without prejudice for failure to complete service, leaving Jenn Gross as the only remaining defendant.

The court treated Karsjens’s letter as a notice of voluntary dismissal under Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Because Gross had not answered the complaint or sought summary judgment, Karsjens could dismiss his claims against her without the court’s approval.

The court granted Karsjens’s request, dismissed his claims against Gross without prejudice, and denied Gross’s motion to dismiss as moot. Judge Donovan W. Frank issued the order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Karsjens v. McCauley · No. 0:15-cv-02590
Judge
Donovan Frank
Date
Dec. 20, 2023

Background

Kevin Scott Karsjens, who was representing himself, submitted a letter asking to dismiss the case in its entirety without prejudice. Before this order, the court had adopted a magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissed Karsjens’s claims against Dana Osborne and Thorne Torgerson in their individual capacities without prejudice because Karsjens had not completed service on them. Jenn Gross was the only remaining defendant.

Analysis

Although Karsjens’s letter did not cite Rule 41(a)(1)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court construed it as a notice of voluntary dismissal under that rule. A voluntary dismissal allows a plaintiff to end claims without a ruling on their merits. The court found that Gross had not answered the complaint and had not moved for summary judgment. A motion to dismiss does not count as either an answer or a motion for summary judgment for purposes of this rule. Therefore, Karsjens had the right to voluntarily dismiss his claims against Gross without the court’s approval.

Disposition

The court GRANTED Karsjens’s pro se letter request to dismiss the case in its entirety without prejudice. It DISMISSED Karsjens’s claims against Gross WITHOUT PREJUDICE. It also DENIED AS MOOT Gross’s motion to dismiss. Judge Donovan W. Frank signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.