Group VI: Trials · Last amended March 1, 2017 · Last verified July 14, 2026
In one sentenceRule 41 sets the rules for ending a lawsuit before final judgment, covering voluntary dismissals by the plaintiff, involuntary dismissals for inaction, and dismissal of counterclaims and similar claims.
(A)Without a Court Order. — Subject to Rules 23(e), 23.1(c), 23.2, and 66 and any applicable statute, the plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order by filing:
(i)a notice of dismissal before the opposing party serves either an answer or a motion for summary judgment; or
(ii)a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared.
(B)Effect. — Unless the notice or stipulation states otherwise, the dismissal is without prejudice. But if the plaintiff previously dismissed any federal or state court action based on or including the same claim, a notice of dismissal operates as an adjudication on the merits.
(2)By Court Order; Effect. — Except as provided in Rule 41(a)(1), an action may be dismissed at the plaintiff’s request only by court order, on terms that the court considers proper. If a counterclaim was plead by a defendant prior to the service upon the defendant of the plaintiff’s motion to dismiss, the counterclaim shall remain pending for independent adjudication by the court to the extent permitted by the court’s subject matter jurisdiction. Unless otherwise specified in the order, a dismissal under this paragraph is without prejudice.
(1)By Defendant. — If the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may move to dismiss the action or any claim against it. Unless the dismissal order states otherwise, a dismissal under this subdivision (b) and any dismissal not under this rule — except one for lack of jurisdiction, improper venue, or failure to join a party under Rule 19 — operates as an adjudication on the merits.
(2)By the Court. — Upon its own motion, after reasonable notice to the parties, the court may dismiss, without prejudice, any action not prosecuted or brought to trial with due diligence. See U.R.D.C. 203.
(c)Dismissing a Counterclaim, Crossclaim, or Third-Party Claim. — This rule applies to a dismissal of any counterclaim, crossclaim, or third-party claim. A claimant’s voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) must be made:
(1)before a responsive pleading is served; or
(2)if there is no responsive pleading, before evidence is introduced at a hearing or trial.
(d)Costs of a Previously Dismissed Action. — If a plaintiff who previously dismissed an action in any court files an action based on or including the same claim against the same defendant, the court:
(1)may order the plaintiff to pay all or part of the costs of that previous action; and
(2)may stay the proceedings until the plaintiff has complied.
Amendment History
Added February 2, 2017, effective March 1, 2017. Construction. — Rule is straightforward and the language thereof leaves little room for judicial interpretation, and in ordinary civil cases, a notice of dismissal that complies with the rule ends the proceedings; the dismissal is effective immediately and no court order is required, and the rule is designed to designate a time frame within which the resources of the court and the defendant have yet to be committed so that dismissal without consequence is appropriate, and that time frame ends when either an answer or motion for summary judgment has been filed and served. Peters v. W. Park Hosp., 2003 WY 117, 76 P.3d 821, 2003 Wyo. LEXIS 141 (Wyo. 2003). Courts favor policy of disposition of cases on their merits. — Gaudina v. Haberman, 644 P.2d 159, 1982 Wyo. LEXIS 329 (Wyo. 1982). This rule protects against dilatory plaintiffs. — Rule 3(a) is in the form it is, without a requirement of service of process as part of the commencement of a lawsuit, because it was felt that adequate protection against dilatory plaintiffs was afforded by subdivision (b)(1) of this rule by dismissal for want of prosecution. Quin Blair Enters. v. Julien Constr. Co., 597 P.2d 945, 1979 Wyo. LEXIS 430 (Wyo. 1979). Motion under subdivision (b)(1) similar to one for directed verdict. — The rule that the Supreme Court must assume the evidence in favor of the successful party is true and that every favorable inference which may be reasonably and fairly drawn from it must be indulged in has no application in a motion under subdivision (b)(1), which, under the federal interpretation, has been considered to be similar to one for a directed verdict, wherein the entire evidence must be viewed most favorably to plaintiff, giving him the benefit of all reasonable inferences which may be deduced therefrom. Arbenz v. Debout, 444 P.2d 317, 1968 Wyo. LEXIS 188 (Wyo. 1968). With evidence considered in light favorable to plaintiff. — On an appeal under subdivision (b), the evidence must be considered in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, Fuller, 606 P.2d 306, 1980 Wyo. LEXIS 236 and the conclusions of law are freely reviewable. Kure v. Chevrolet Motor Div., 581 P.2d 603, 1978 Wyo. LEXIS 203 (Wyo. 1978); Angus Hunt Ranch, Inc. v. Reb, Inc., 577 P.2d 645, 1978 Wyo. LEXIS 287 (Wyo. 1978); Amfac Mechanical Supply Co. v. Federer, 645 P.2d 73, 1982 Wyo. LEXIS 341 (Wyo. 1982). Where the plaintiff’s evidence shows that the plaintiff-buyer repeatedly sought performance on a warranty and failed to receive it and has thus established a broken promise entitling him to damages, the motion to dismiss under this rule was improvidently granted. Kure v. Chevrolet Motor Div., 581 P.2d 603, 1978 Wyo. LEXIS 203 (Wyo. 1978). In a nonjury case, where the trial court has dismissed the plaintiff’s suit at the end of the presentation of his evidence, the appellate court is bound to consider the evidence as it Supply Co. v. Federer, 645 P.2d 73, 1982 Wyo. LEXIS 341 (Wyo. 1982). And court may set out findings and conclusions orally. — Where the court set out its findings and conclusions orally, preserving them by stenographic reporting in the transcript as part of the record, the technical requirements of Rule 52(a), referred to in this rule, have been met. Kure v. Chevrolet Motor Div., 581 P.2d 603, 1978 Wyo. LEXIS 203 (Wyo. 1978). When motion to dismiss should be granted. — Where the plaintiff has failed in his proof the motion to dismiss should be granted, but where plaintiff ’s proof is overwhelming the motion should be denied. Shook v. Bell, 599 P.2d 1320, 1979 Wyo. LEXIS 446 (Wyo. 1979). The plaintiff ’s complaint was properly dismissed for failure to present some evidence on each of the essential elements of his action. Osborn v. Manning, 685 P.2d 1121, 1984 Wyo. LEXIS 327 (Wyo. 1984). And when motion should be denied. — The plaintiff may not be denied relief solely on the grounds that he may be entitled to the exact relief that he requested in his complaint. Washakie County Sch. Dist. v. Herschler, 606 P.2d 310, 1980 Wyo. LEXIS 227 (Wyo.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 824, 101 S. Ct. 86, 66 L. Ed. 2d Morris, 756 P.2d 774, 1988 Wyo. LEXIS 92 28, 1980 U.S. LEXIS 2692 (U.S. 1980). Motion not granted until all evidence presented. — Where plaintiff has presented a prima facie case based on unimpeached evi-
Plain-English Summary
Rule 41(a) gives a plaintiff two ways to walk away from a case without a court order: filing a notice of dismissal before the other side answers or moves for summary judgment, or filing a stipulation signed by everyone who has appeared. Either way, the dismissal is without prejudice unless it says otherwise — with one important exception. If the plaintiff already dismissed the same claim once before in any federal or state court, a second notice of dismissal counts as a decision on the merits, closing the door on a third attempt. Once the case has moved past that early stage, a plaintiff needs a court order to dismiss, on whatever terms the court considers fair, and any counterclaim already pending when the dismissal motion was served stays alive for the court to decide separately.
Rule 41(b) works from the other side. If the plaintiff fails to prosecute the case or ignores the rules or a court order, the defendant can move to dismiss, and that dismissal — like most dismissals not otherwise covered by the rule — counts as a decision on the merits unless it rests on lack of jurisdiction, improper venue, or failure to join a necessary party. The court can also dismiss a stalled case on its own, after giving the parties notice, though that kind of dismissal is without prejudice.
The same dismissal framework applies to a counterclaim, crossclaim, or third-party claim, with the voluntary-dismissal window measured against when the responsive pleading is served or, if there is none, before evidence comes in at a hearing or trial. Finally, Rule 41(d) protects a defendant who gets sued again on a claim the plaintiff already dismissed once: the court can order the plaintiff to cover costs from the earlier suit and can pause the new case until that happens.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can a plaintiff drop a case without asking the court?
Yes, but only early on. A plaintiff can file a notice of dismissal before the defendant answers or moves for summary judgment, or file a stipulation signed by everyone who has appeared.
Is a voluntary dismissal always without prejudice?
Usually, but not always. If the plaintiff already dismissed the same claim once before in any court, a second notice of dismissal counts as an adjudication on the merits and bars refiling.
What happens to the defendant's counterclaim if the plaintiff dismisses?
If the defendant pled a counterclaim before being served with the plaintiff's dismissal motion, that counterclaim stays pending for the court to decide on its own, to the extent the court has jurisdiction over it.
Can a case be dismissed for failing to move it forward?
Yes. Under Rule 41(b), a defendant can move to dismiss if the plaintiff fails to prosecute the case or comply with the rules or a court order, and that dismissal generally counts as a merits decision.
What happens if a plaintiff refiles a case after dismissing it once?
The court may order the plaintiff to pay some or all of the costs from the earlier dismissed action and may stay the new case until those costs are paid.
Source & verification. Rule text and amendment history are
reproduced verbatim from the Wyoming Rules of Civil Procedure, adopted by the
Supreme Court of Wyoming. Last verified July 14, 2026. ·
Official source
Also known as:voluntary dismissal wyomingdismiss lawsuit without prejudicefailure to prosecute dismissaltwo dismissal ruleinvoluntary dismissal civil case