JAMES v. LADD, 3:14-cv-00020-KGB. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20150902551
Visitors: 13
Filed: Sep. 01, 2015
Latest Update: Sep. 01, 2015
Summary: ORDER KRISTINE G. BAKER , District Judge . Plaintiff Brian James has not responded to or complied with the Court's prior Order to notify the Court of his current address (Dkt. No. 13). Pursuant to Rule 5.5(c)(2) of the Rules of the United States District Courts for the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas, the Court dismisses without prejudice this action (Dkt. Nos. 1, 4). Mr. James filed suit against defendants Officer Asa Ladd and the City of Jonesboro Police Department. The Court
Summary: ORDER KRISTINE G. BAKER , District Judge . Plaintiff Brian James has not responded to or complied with the Court's prior Order to notify the Court of his current address (Dkt. No. 13). Pursuant to Rule 5.5(c)(2) of the Rules of the United States District Courts for the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas, the Court dismisses without prejudice this action (Dkt. Nos. 1, 4). Mr. James filed suit against defendants Officer Asa Ladd and the City of Jonesboro Police Department. The Court d..
More
ORDER
KRISTINE G. BAKER, District Judge.
Plaintiff Brian James has not responded to or complied with the Court's prior Order to notify the Court of his current address (Dkt. No. 13). Pursuant to Rule 5.5(c)(2) of the Rules of the United States District Courts for the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas, the Court dismisses without prejudice this action (Dkt. Nos. 1, 4).
Mr. James filed suit against defendants Officer Asa Ladd and the City of Jonesboro Police Department. The Court dismissed Mr. James's claims against the City of Jonesboro Police Department (Dkt. No. 12). The Court is aware that Officer Ladd filed a motion for summary judgment that is pending. Based on a review of the docket in this matter, it appears that Mr. James did not receive Officer Ladd's answer (Dkt. No. 19). The Court notes that Officer Ladd attempted service of the motion for summary judgment on Mr. James at the same address to which Officer Ladd sent his answer (Dkt. No. 20). As a result, Mr. James may not have received a copy of the motion for summary judgment. For these reasons, the Court declines to reach the merits of the motion for summary judgment. The Court denies all pending motions as moot and dismisses without prejudice this action for the reasons stated.
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
