HMI - Wills Point, LLC v. Wills Point, Texas et al

- 1 -
No. 6:24-cv-00114
HMI – Wills Point, LLC,
Plaintiff,
v.
City of Wills Point et al.,
Defendants.
O R D E R
Plaintiff HMI – Wills Point, LLC brought this action alleging
violations of its constitutional rights and seeking declaratory relief
and monetary damages. Doc. 1. The court subsequently dismissed
plaintiff’s request for declaratory relief without prejudice and
stayed this litigation pending resolution of plaintiff’s litigation be-
fore the Texas Public Utility Commission. Doc. 14. Upon resolu-
tion of those proceedings, the stay was lifted and this case was
referred to a magistrate judge. Docs. 19–20. Defendants subse-
quently answered the complaint and moved for judgment on the
pleadings. Doc. 22. Plaintiff never responded to that motion, and
the magistrate judge issued a report recommending that the court
grant defendants’ motion in part and dismiss plaintiff’s constitu-
tional claims with prejudice. Doc. 34 at 15.
Plaintiff filed no written objections. Instead, plaintiff filed an
agreed notice of voluntary dismissal with prejudice of defendant
Pam Pearson and a notice of voluntary dismissal without preju-
dice of defendant City of Wills Point. Docs. 35, 38. Defendants
agreed to the dismissal of defendant Pearson. Doc. 35 at 1. But
they stated that they would not agree to dismissal of the City un-
less the dismissal would be with prejudice. Doc. 38 at 1.
A plaintiff may dismiss an action without court order under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a) by filing a notice of dismis-
sal “before the opposing party serves an answer or a motion for
summary judgment.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i). If either an
Case 6:24-cv-00114-JCB-KNM Document 39 Filed 01/09/26 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

- 2 -
answer or motion for summary judgment has been filed, a plaintiff
can dismiss the action by filing “a stipulation of dismissal signed
by all parties who have appeared.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).
Here, defendants answered the complaint before plaintiff filed
its notices of dismissal. Thus, plaintiff cannot dismiss either de-
fendant with a notice under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i). And because
plaintiff’s notices are not stipulations signed by all parties who
have appeared, plaintiff has not dismissed either defendant under
Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii).1
Turning to the report, the court reviews objected-to portions
of a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation de novo. 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). But when no ob-
jections to a report have been filed, “the court need only satisfy
itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.” Fed.
R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory committee’s notes to 1983 amendment.
Having reviewed the record and being satisfied that there is no
clear error, the court accepts the report’s findings and recommen-
dations. Defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings (Doc.
22) is granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff’s constitutional
claims are dismissed with prejudice. Defendants’ motion as to
plaintiff’s request for declaratory relief is denied as moot. Any
pending motions are denied as moot.
So ordered by the court on January 9, 2026.
J. CAM PB EL L BA RK ER
United States District Judge
1 Counsel for defendants signed the notice of dismissal of defendant Pear-
son only in agreement “as to form and content.” Doc. 35 at 2. Agreeing to form
and content is not the same as signing a document under Rules 11 and 41(a). In
addition, the signature is not accompanied by the attorney’s address, email
address, and telephone number as required by Rule 11(a).
Case 6:24-cv-00114-JCB-KNM Document 39 Filed 01/09/26 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>