Re: "News" Verizon calls SFLC bluff

[rjack]

amicus_curious wrote:
> "Linonut" <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote in message 
> news:57CDj.11278$%15.9389@bignews7.bellsouth.net...
> > Then why did they bother?  And, if SFLC was at such a disadvantage, why
> > wouldn't big ol' Verizon just go ahead and let little ol' SFLC take its
> > beating in court?
> They couldn't object to a voluntary dismissal.  That is an action in 
> their favor.  They could countersue in some way, perhaps, but the SFLC 
> is just a flea and Verizon has a lot more to do than worry about 
> something like that after it has gone away anyway.

Technically you are correct according to FRCP 41. That leaves us to 
simply speculate as to why the plaintiffs Andersen and Landley committed 
legal suicide:

"A voluntary dismissal with prejudice operates as a final adjudication 
on the merits and has a res judicata effect. Harrison v. Edison Bros. 
Apparel Stores, Inc., 924 F.2d 530, 534 (4th Cir. 1991) (concluding that 
a voluntary dismissal with prejudice 'is a complete adjudication on the 
merits of the dismissed claim.')"; The Travelers Insurance Company v. 
AlliedSignal TBS Holdings, 2001 FED App. 0357P (6th Cir.)

Sincerely,
Rjack