37 F.R.D. 542 | E.D.S.C. | 1965
Plaintiff moves for voluntary dismissal under provisions of Rule 41(a) (2)
This Court has previously
[t]he rule governing dismissal for want of jurisdiction in cases brought in the federal court is that, unless the law gives a different rule, the sum claimed by the plaintiff controls if the claim is apparently made in good faith. It must appear to a legal certainty that the claim is really for less than the jurisdictional amount to justify dismissal.
When the complaint was filed in this case counsel were of the opinion, as advised by medical specialists, that the physical condition of plaintiff (a stroke) could and should be related to the alleged injury allegedly proximately caused by negligence of defendant(s). When the facts revealed otherwise the court was properly advised in the motion. Good faith is evident throughout.
A plaintiff generally has the right to a voluntary dismissal, upon the payment of the defendant’s costs, unless it appears that the defendant would suffer from plain legal prejudice other than the mere prospect of a second lawsuit. Cone v. West Virginia Pulp & Paper Co., 330 U.S. 212, 217, 67 S.Ct. 752, 91 L.Ed. 849. This Court, having the right
And it is so ordered.
. “Except as provided in paragraph (1) of this subdivision of this rule, an action shall not be dismissed at the plaintiff’s instance save upon order of the court and upon such terms and conditions as the court deems proper.”
. 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1332(a) each provide jurisdiction “where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $10,000, exclusive of interest and costs.”
. Petroleum Transit Co., Inc. v. Copeland, 240 F.Supp. 585 (E.D.S.C.1965).
. See Home Owners Loan Corp. v. Huffman (8 C.A.1943) 134 F.2d 314; Barnett v. Terminal R. Ass’n of St. Louis (8 C.A. 1953) 200 F.2d 893, cert. den. 73 S.Ct. 938, 345 U.S. 956, 97 L.Ed. 1377.