Forehand v. Nextaff of Jackson, Tennessee, LLC et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
EASTERN DIVISION
______________________________________________________________________________
LURONZO FOREHAND, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	)
v. 	) 	No. 1:26-cv-1095-STA-jay
)
NEXTAFF OF JACKSON, 	)
TENNESSEE, LLC; 	)
LISA MYERS; and 	)
NEXTAFF GROUP, LLC, 	)
)
Defendants. 	)
______________________________________________________________________________
ORDER ON NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT
ORDER GRANTING JOINT RULE 21 MOTION TO DROP PARTIES
ORDER DENYING PENDING MOTIONS AS MOOT (ECF NOS. 25, 27, 34)
______________________________________________________________________________
Before the Court is a Notice of Settlement (ECF No. 39) filed on October 14, 2026, by
Plaintiff Luronzo Forehand and Defendants Nextaff of Jackson, Tennessee1 and Lisa Meyers. The
parties report that they have reached an out-of-court settlement to resolve their dispute. Local Rule
83.13 requires the parties to a civil action to promptly notify the Court whenever they reach an
agreement to settle their dispute. The parties’ Notice of Settlement satisfies the requirements of
Local Rule 83.13. The Rule goes on to give the parties 28 days to file a notice of voluntary
1 The Joint Motion reports that Plaintiff has reached a settlement with “Southern Staffing,
LLC (Nextaff of Jackson, TN).” Defendant Nextaff of Jackson, Tennessee recently argued in a
motion to dismiss that Southern Staffing, LLC was the proper party to be named, not Nextaff of
Jackson, Tennessee. The United States Magistrate Judge has issued a Report and Recommendation
(ECF No. 34) on the motion to dismiss, noting that the entity doing business as “Nextaff of
Jackson, TN” is Southern Staffing, LLC and recommending that the Court substitute Southern
Staffing, LLC as a Defendant in place of Nextaff of Jackson, Tennessee. Technically, the parties’
Notice of Settlement now renders the motion to dismiss moot. Nevertheless, the Court notes for
the record that Plaintiff has agreed to settle his claims against Southern Staffing, LLC, which
Plaintiff identified in his pleadings as Nextaff of Jackson, Tennessee.
Case 1:26-cv-01095-STA-jay Document 40 Filed 10/15/26 Page 1 of 3 PageID
<pageID>

2
dismissal or stipulation of dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a). In this case,
the settling parties have moved pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 21 to drop Defendants
Nextaff of Jackson, Tennessee and Lisa Meyers as parties to the case.
Rule 21 permits a court “[o]n motion or on its own” to add or drop a party or sever a claim
against a party. Fed. R. Civ. P. 21. The parties’ request to “drop” Nextaff of Jackson, Tennessee
and Ms. Meyers as parties is the kind of relief available under Rule 21. Newman-Green, Inc. v.
Alfonzo-Larrain, 490 U.S. 826, 832 (1989) (“It is well settled that Rule 21 invests district courts
with authority to allow a dispensable nondiverse party to be dropped at any time, even after
judgment has been rendered.”).2 Therefore, the Joint Motion is GRANTED. The Court
DISMISSES Plaintiff’s claims against both Defendants with prejudice. The Clerk of Court is
hereby directed to terminate Nextaff of Jackson, Tennessee and Lisa Meyers as parties to this
action.
This just leaves Plaintiff’s claims against Nextaff Group, LLC. The Magistrate Judge has
2 As the parties acknowledge, some courts within the Sixth Circuit have interpreted Rule
21 to apply when a plaintiff seeks to dismiss a single party but not the entire suit. This Court has
taken a different view. In re AME Church Empl. Ret. Fund Litig., No. 1:22-md-03035, 2025 WL
2522969, at *4 (W.D. Tenn. Sept. 2, 2025) (finding that Rule 41 provides the correct procedural
device for the dismissal of a party).
The Court would note that last year the Advisory Committee proposed two amendments to
Rule 41(a), one of which “adds additional flexibility for litigants by explicitly permitting the
dismissal of one or more claims in an action, rather than only the entire action, as the text of the
current rule suggests.” Excerpt from the Report of the Advisory Committee on Civil Rules, May
15, 2025, https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/document/preliminary-draft-of-proposed-
amendments-to-federal-rules_august2025.pdf. More recently, the Judicial Conference of the
United States has adopted the proposed amendments as part of a process that would have the
amendments take effect next year. See Rep. of Jud. Conf. Committee on Rules of Prac. & Proc.,
Sept. 1, 2026 (“The proposed amendments to Rule 41(a) clarify that a plaintiff may obtain a
voluntary dismissal of one or more claims raised in a complaint without dismissing the entire
action. This change responds to decisions in some courts interpreting the current language to mean
that only an entire case, that is, all claims against all defendants, or only all claims against one or
more defendants, could be dismissed under the rule.”).
Case 1:26-cv-01095-STA-jay Document 40 Filed 10/15/26 Page 2 of 3 PageID
<pageID>

3
set a hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment (ECF No. 20) against Nextaff Group,
LLC for November 3, 2026. The dismissal of Nextaff of Jackson, Tennessee and Lisa Meyers has
no effect on Plaintiff’s remaining claims against Nextaff Group, LLC or his Motion for Default
Judgment against that party.
Finally, the parties’ settlement has rendered the following motions moot: Defendants’
Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 25), Plaintiff’s Motion for Hearing on the Motion to Dismiss (ECF
No. 27), and the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation on the Motions (ECF No. 34).
Therefore, the Clerk of Court is also directed to terminate the pending Motions and the Report and
Recommendation as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ S. Thomas Anderson
S. THOMAS ANDERSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Date: October 15, 2026
Case 1:26-cv-01095-STA-jay Document 40 Filed 10/15/26 Page 3 of 3 PageID
<pageID>