Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

HAMILTON v. U.S., 2:15-cv-82-FtM-38CM. (2015)

Court: District Court, M.D. Florida Number: infdco20150715803 Visitors: 19
Filed: Jul. 14, 2015
Latest Update: Jul. 14, 2015
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on sua sponte review of the docket. Plaintiffs Gerald Hamilton and Jack Ward initiated this lawsuit against the United States on February 10, 2015. (Doc. #1). The Complaint alleges plaintiffs were in a car accident caused by a United States Postal Service vehicle. Plaintiffs seek redress pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act. Plaintiffs filed a return of service on the docket on April 9, 2015. (Doc. #
More

ORDER1

This matter comes before the Court on sua sponte review of the docket. Plaintiffs Gerald Hamilton and Jack Ward initiated this lawsuit against the United States on February 10, 2015. (Doc. #1). The Complaint alleges plaintiffs were in a car accident caused by a United States Postal Service vehicle. Plaintiffs seek redress pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act. Plaintiffs filed a return of service on the docket on April 9, 2015. (Doc. #8). It appears, however, service has not been conducted properly. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(i)(1).The Court will give plaintiffs limited time to correct their error.

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED:

Plaintiffs shall correct their service error and file a proper return of service no later than September 11, 2015, otherwise this matter will be dismissed.

DONE and ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users' convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other Web sites, this court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer