WELLFOUNT, CORPORATION v. HENNIS CARE CENTRE OF BOLIVAR, INC.; MEGCO MANAGEMENT, INC.; HENNIS CARE CENTRE OF DOVER, INC - Articles

All Content

WELLFOUNT, CORPORATION v. HENNIS CARE CENTRE OF BOLIVAR, INC.; MEGCO MANAGEMENT, INC.; HENNIS CARE CENTRE OF DOVER, INC

Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Mar 3, 2020

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ON BRIEF: Joseph F. Petros III, ROLF GOFFMAN MARTIN LANG LLP, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellants. Lynn Rowe Larsen, Matthew B. Barbara, TAFT STETTINIUS & HOLLISTER, Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellee.

Judge(s): GIBBONS, McKEAGUE, and WHITE, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio at Akron

JULIA SMITH GIBBONS, Circuit Judge. Hennis Care Centre of Bolivar, Inc., MEGCO Management, Inc., and Hennis Care Centre of Dover, Inc. (collectively, “Hennis”) appeal the district court’s dismissal of Wellfount Corporation’s action. Wellfount filed its complaint in district court after first withdrawing an earlier suit involving the same claims in Indiana state court. Upon hearing from Hennis that the new complaint was likely filed in the wrong forum, Wellfount moved the district court for an order dismissing its action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(2). Hennis, which had yet to file an answer, responded with its own motion asking the court to convert Wellfount’s motion into a notice of dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1). The district court denied Hennis’s motion and granted Wellfount’s motion. On appeal, Hennis argues that, because Wellfount was eligible to file a self-effectuating notice of dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1) and had previously withdrawn an action based on the same claims, the court was without discretion to dismiss Wellfount’s action under Rule 41(a)(2). We disagree and affirm. I

Attachments: