Full text of the filing (22 sections, server-rendered)
Caption and Motion Introduction, p. 1 (p. 1-1)
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA )
COUNTY OF CHARLESTON ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON
) PLEAS
) NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
James C. (“Chris”) McNeil and ) Meaghan Poyer, ) Civil Action No. 2025-CP-10-05095 ) Plaintiffs, ) PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR )
VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL
v. )
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
) PURSUANT TO
SAC 181, LLC, )
RULE 41(a)(2), SCRCP Meridian Residential Group, LLC, ) Adam W. Bayles, individually, ) Tara Bayles, individually, and ) MRG Investing Company LLC ) ) Defendants. ) _____________________________________ )
TO: ALL PARTIES AND COUNSEL OF RECORD:
Plaintiffs James C. McNeil and Meaghan Poyer, appearing pro se, respectfully move this Court pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2), SCRCP, for an Order dismissing the above-captioned action without prejudice. In support, Plaintiffs state as follows:
Caption and Motion, p. 1 (p. 1-1)
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA )
COUNTY OF CHARLESTON ) IN THE COURT OF COMMON
) PLEAS
) NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
James C. (“Chris”) McNeil and ) Meaghan Poyer, ) Civil Action No. 2025-CP-10-05095 ) Plaintiffs, ) PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR )
VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL
v. )
WITHOUT PREJUDICE
) PURSUANT TO
SAC 181, LLC, )
RULE 41(a)(2), SCRCP Meridian Residential Group, LLC, ) Adam W. Bayles, individually, ) Tara Bayles, individually, and ) MRG Investing Company LLC ) ) Defendants. ) _____________________________________ )
TO: ALL PARTIES AND COUNSEL OF RECORD:
Plaintiffs James C. McNeil and Meaghan Poyer, appearing pro se, respectfully move this Court pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2), SCRCP, for an Order dismissing the above-captioned action without prejudice. In support, Plaintiffs state as follows:
Paragraph 1, pp. 1-2 (p. 1-2)
1. Plaintiffs intend to pursue in the United States District Court for the District of South
Carolina the claims arising from the common nucleus of operative facts in this matter, including federal fair-housing and civil-rights claims arising under federal law, for which federal-question jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Plaintiffs further intend to pursue related state-law claims, including related tort and other claims, that may properly proceed in that forum under the supplemental jurisdiction conferred by 28 U.S.C. § 1367.
Paragraph 1, pp. 1-2 (p. 1-2)
1. Plaintiffs intend to pursue in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina the claims arising from the common nucleus of operative facts in this matter, including federal fair-housing and civil-rights claims arising under federal law, for which federal-question jurisdiction exists under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Plaintiffs further intend to pursue related state-law claims, including related tort and other claims, that may properly proceed in that forum under the supplemental jurisdiction conferred by 28 U.S.C. § 1367.
Paragraph 2, p. 2 (p. 2-2)
2. The federal-forum path has already been expressly placed in the record. In Plaintiffs’
May 26, 2026 Emergency Motion for Health Continuance, Plaintiffs set out the ripened federal posture created by the unresolved ADA accommodation request and related procedural conditions. Plaintiffs reiterated that venue concern in substance at the May 28, 2026 hearing.
Paragraph 2, p. 2 (p. 2-2)
2. The federal-forum path has already been expressly placed in the record. In Plaintiffs’ May 26, 2026 Emergency Motion for Health Continuance, Plaintiffs set out the ripened federal posture created by the unresolved ADA accommodation request and related procedural conditions. Plaintiffs reiterated that venue concern in substance at the May 28, 2026 hearing.
Paragraph 3, p. 2 (p. 2-2)
3. Under settled South Carolina law, voluntary dismissal without prejudice should be
granted unless the opposing party demonstrates legal prejudice, and the burden of showing such prejudice rests on the party seeking to defeat the motion. Bowen & Smoot v. Plumlee, 301 S.C. 262, 391 S.E.2d 558 (1990); Prime Medical Corp. v. First Medical Corp., 291 S.C. 296, 353 S.E.2d 294 (Ct. App. 1987); see also Knight v. Waggoner, Op. No. 2004-UP-256 (S.C. Ct. App. filed Apr. 5, 2004). Where no legal prejudice is shown, dismissal without prejudice is required; only upon a showing of prejudice does the matter become discretionary.
Paragraph 3, p. 2 (p. 2-2)
3. Under settled South Carolina law, voluntary dismissal without prejudice should be
granted unless the opposing party demonstrates legal prejudice, and the burden of showing such prejudice rests on the party seeking to defeat the motion. Bowen & Smoot v. Plumlee, 301 S.C. 262, 391 S.E.2d 558 (1990); Prime Medical Corp. v. First Medical Corp., 291 S.C. 296, 353 S.E.2d 294 (Ct. App. 1987); see also Knight v. Waggoner, Op. No. 2004-UP-256 (S.C. Ct. App. filed Apr. 5, 2004). Where no legal prejudice is shown, dismissal without prejudice is required; only upon a showing of prejudice does the matter become discretionary.
Paragraph 4, p. 2 (p. 2-2)
4. No Defendant will suffer substantial legal prejudice from dismissal without prejudice.
Defendants have appeared, litigated motions, and participated in discovery-related proceedings sufficient to place the factual basis of Plaintiffs’ claims fully in view and to eliminate any element of unfair surprise from refiling in federal court.
Paragraph 4, p. 2 (p. 2-2)
4. No Defendant will suffer substantial legal prejudice from dismissal without prejudice.
Defendants have appeared, litigated motions, and participated in discovery-related proceedings sufficient to place the factual basis of Plaintiffs’ claims fully in view and to eliminate any element of unfair surprise from refiling in federal court.
Paragraph 5, pp. 2-3 (p. 2-3)
5. This action has not proceeded to summary judgment or trial, and dismissal at this stage
avoids unnecessary duplication by allowing the federal claims and the related state-law claims arising from the same operative facts to proceed in a single forum.
Paragraph 5, pp. 2-3 (p. 2-3)
5. This action has not proceeded to summary judgment or trial, and dismissal at this stage
avoids unnecessary duplication by allowing the federal claims and the related state-law claims arising from the same operative facts to proceed in a single forum.
Paragraph 6, p. 3 (p. 3-3)
6. To the extent the Court considers terms under Rule 41(a)(2), SCRCP, any such terms
should be minimal, as Defendants face no prejudice cognizable under the governing standard. The discovery and motion practice already completed in this action materially reduce any duplication of effort or expense in the contemplated federal action arising from the same operative facts. The mere prospect that Plaintiffs may pursue their claims in another forum is not legal prejudice and provides no basis for an award of fees or costs against Plaintiffs. See Prime Medical Corp., supra; cf. Rule 41(a)(2), SCRCP (terms imposed only as “proper” to obviate genuine prejudice).
Paragraph 6, p. 3 (p. 3-3)
6. To the extent the Court considers terms under Rule 41(a)(2), SCRCP, any such terms
should be minimal, as Defendants face no prejudice cognizable under the governing standard. The discovery and motion practice already completed in this action materially reduce any duplication of effort or expense in the contemplated federal action arising from the same operative facts. The mere prospect that Plaintiffs may pursue their claims in another forum is not legal prejudice and provides no basis for an award of fees or costs against Plaintiffs. See Prime Medical Corp., supra; cf. Rule 41(a)(2), SCRCP (terms imposed only as “proper” to obviate genuine prejudice).
Paragraph 7, p. 3 (p. 3-3)
7. This is not a second voluntary dismissal of these claims by Plaintiffs within the meaning
of Rule 41(a)(1), SCRCP.
Paragraph 7, p. 3 (p. 3-3)
7. This is not a second voluntary dismissal of these claims by Plaintiffs within the meaning
of Rule 41(a)(1), SCRCP.
Paragraph 8, p. 3 (p. 3-3)
8. Plaintiffs seek dismissal without prejudice so they may pursue appropriate claims in
federal court, with the rights of all parties to be governed there by the applicable rules of jurisdiction, limitations, preclusion, and related doctrines.
Paragraph 8, p. 3 (p. 3-3)
8. Plaintiffs seek dismissal without prejudice so they may pursue appropriate claims in
federal court, with the rights of all parties to be governed there by the applicable rules of jurisdiction, limitations, preclusion, and related doctrines.
Paragraph 9, p. 3 (p. 3-3)
9. Consistent with the October 7, 2025 return instruction issued from the Office of Chief
Administrative Judge Jennifer B. McCoy in this case - stating that motions were to be set for hearing and that proposed orders were unnecessary unless requested by the judge - Plaintiffs submit this motion without a proposed order and stand ready to provide one promptly upon request of the Court.
Paragraph 9, p. 3 (p. 3-3)
9. Consistent with the October 7, 2025 return instruction issued from the Office of Chief
Administrative Judge Jennifer B. McCoy in this case - stating that motions were to be set for hearing and that proposed orders were unnecessary unless requested by the judge - Plaintiffs submit this motion without a proposed order and stand ready to provide one promptly upon request of the Court.
Wherefore Clause and Signatures, pp. 3-4 (p. 3-4)
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter an Order dismissing this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2), SCRCP, and granting such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. Respectfully submitted this 22 nd day of June, 2026.
James C. (“Chris”) McNeil, Pro Se P.O. Box 30386, Charleston, SC 29417 chris@thaut.io
Meaghan Poyer, Pro Se P.O. Box 30386, Charleston, SC 29417 mcneilandpoyer@gmail.com
Prayer and Signatures, pp. 3-4 (p. 3-4)
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfully request that this Court enter an Order dismissing this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2), SCRCP, and granting such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. Respectfully submitted this 22 nd day of June, 2026.
James C. (“Chris”) McNeil, Pro Se P.O. Box 30386, Charleston, SC 29417 chris@thaut.io
Meaghan Poyer, Pro Se P.O. Box 30386, Charleston, SC 29417 mcneilandpoyer@gmail.com