Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Walls v. City of Detroit, 17-cv-10660. (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan Number: infdco20190607f56 Visitors: 26
Filed: Jun. 06, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 06, 2019
Summary: ORDER DISMISSING AMENDED COMPLAINT (ECF #24) WITHOUT PREJUDICE MATTHEW F. LEITMAN , District Judge . On March 22, 2019, the Court entered an order allowing the then-attorneys for Plaintiff Dalvin Walls to withdraw as counsel in this action. ( See Order, ECF #43.) In that order, the Court instructed Walls that, by no later than May 10, 2019, he needed to "either (1) have new counsel file an Appearance in this action on his behalf," or "(2) file written notice with the Court ... that he wil
More

ORDER DISMISSING AMENDED COMPLAINT (ECF #24) WITHOUT PREJUDICE

On March 22, 2019, the Court entered an order allowing the then-attorneys for Plaintiff Dalvin Walls to withdraw as counsel in this action. (See Order, ECF #43.) In that order, the Court instructed Walls that, by no later than May 10, 2019, he needed to "either (1) have new counsel file an Appearance in this action on his behalf," or "(2) file written notice with the Court ... that he will represent himself in this action." (Id. at Pg. ID 298.) The Court then told Walls that "[i]f either counsel [did] not file an appearance on [his] behalf by May 10, 2019, or if [he did] not file written notice by that date that he intend[ed] to represent himself, the Court [would] enter an order dismissing this action without prejudice." (Id.) The Court further instructed Walls' then-counsel to serve him with a copy of the order, and counsel filed proof of that service on March 25, 2019. (See ECF #44.)

New counsel has not filed on Appearance in this action on Walls' behalf. Nor has Walls filed written notice with the Court that he intends to represent himself. Finally, Walls has not contacted the Court to ask for additional time to respond to the Court's March 22, 2019, order.

Accordingly, because Walls has not complied with the Court's March 22, 2019, order, and because Walls has failed to prosecute this action, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Walls's Amended Complaint (ECF #24) is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

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