WDW Litigation Update - March 9, 2020 - Bedtime for the Bed Bugs Lawsuit.

[DrunkJam]

This was not a jury trial. The judge will decide the merits. It is common in federal court to have the parties submit post-hearing briefs before the judge rules. The briefs typically argue the legal issues and any factual or credibility issues.

Thank you for this, this makes it much clearer to me what happens next.

 

[jcb]

The bed bug lawsuit mentioned in the first post - not to be confused with the bug-in-lettuce-at-the-poly lawsuit - is over for now. Today, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their lawsuit without prejudice. Disney agreed to the dismissal. The “without prejudice“ modifier means that, in theory, the lawsuit could be refilled. In federal court, dismissals with or without prejudice mean different things. Typically, with prejudice is supposed to be a decision on the merits and precludes refilling. Without prejudice permits a refilling. This is a general rule. Some states don’t rigidly adhere to the “with” and “without” prejudice labels but look at the circumstances behind the dismissal, e.g., a settlement which releases all claims.

Odds are, though, that this voluntary dismissal heralds that a settlement is in the works and the parties were up against a court deadline so they went ahead and dismissed the court action. That’s just a guess.

 

[Fred M]

Odds are, though, that this voluntary dismissal heralds that a settlement is in the works and the parties were up against a court deadline so they went ahead and dismissed the court action. That’s just a guess.

That's generally how we do business out here in state court actions in California. Plaintiffs usually dismiss without prejudice as a sign of good faith to do the deal, then the settlement funds pretty quickly right after that.