It depends on why the suit was dismissed but you would probably be wasting your time and money resubmitting a lawsuit that the court had already determined was inactionable without making changes to the core of it to render it actionable.
Only with more evidence.
It means that the lawsuit has been dismissed, typically after being decided on the merits, and cannot be refiled.The foregoing answer is correct. The dismissal with prejudice can also be voluntary on the part of the plaintiff. That is often a condition of a settlement of litigation.
The following can be gleaned from the wording supplied by the questioner: (1) One of the parties involved in a civil lawsuit filed a counter-claim against the other party. (2) the counterclaim was dismissed by the judge BUT the judge did not preclude the counter-claim from being re-worded or re-filed (i.e.: without prejudice). (3) The judge's reason was that, in their opinion, whatever matter the counter-claim raised was already addressed in the original suit (i.e.: moot).
If the criminal charges of rape and sodomy were subsequently dismissed (BUT, you don't say if it was dismissed WITH or WITHOUT prejudice!) I would say that you have no cause of action on the disposition of the criminal charges. However allegations of slander and discrimination are CIVIL chargesand are separate and apart from the criminal action. Contact a good civil attorney for advice.
A "Dismissed without Prejudice" order means that the lawsuit is being dismissed by the court, but the case can be re-filed if the party chooses to re-file. This often happens when a lawsuit is filed but, for some reason, it is not pursued. Maybe a plaintiff becomes ill, or maybe a witness can't be located. The possibilities are endless. Rather than the case sitting in the court docket without there being any activity on it, the court dismisses it. On the other hand, a case that is "Dismissed WITH Prejudice" means, usually, that the claim is barred from being refiled.
The debts are still valid and creditors can continue with collection procedures including, in most cases, a lawsuit.
The Plaintiff may withdraw the lawsuit, however, since the defendants have filed their counter claim, the suit will continue (now) against the plaintiff.
If you are talking about the lawsuit filed by Don Felder (and the subsequent counter-suit filed by Don Henley and Glenn Frey) then yes...this has been settled out of court. The details of the settlement are not public.
If you can afford it, you can file a lawsuit against anyone for anything. Whether or not you will be successful is a separate question.
Yes. It is usually the only other option for a borrower. If not the creditor might seek legal recourse in the form of a lawsuit. Even though the idea of a lawsuit is "scary" it can be a better choice than BK, depending on circumstances of the borrower.
Yes, that's what 'without prejudice' means. When something is dismissed with prejudice, this is due to some kind of misconduct on the side of the party making the claim. They're then disallowed from refiling it. However if it's dismissed without prejudice, often due to a precedural error, it can be refiled.
If the statute of limitations has not passed, you would be able to refile. However, almost all civil lawsuits are going to be past the limit at 18 years.