RANSOM v. CHATHAM COUNTY, CV414-274. (2016)
Court: District Court, S.D. Georgia
Number: infdco20160105796
Visitors: 9
Filed: Jan. 04, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 04, 2016
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION G.R. SMITH , Magistrate Judge . After four months of post-answer inactivity (which violated a Court order, see doe. 3, and Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f)), the Court recently ordered plaintiff Tashiba Ransom to show cause no later than December 22, 2015 why this case should not be dismissed on abandonment grounds. Doe. 9. She never responded. This case, therefore, should be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); S.D. Ga. L.R. 41.1(c); Taylor v. Augu
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION G.R. SMITH , Magistrate Judge . After four months of post-answer inactivity (which violated a Court order, see doe. 3, and Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f)), the Court recently ordered plaintiff Tashiba Ransom to show cause no later than December 22, 2015 why this case should not be dismissed on abandonment grounds. Doe. 9. She never responded. This case, therefore, should be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); S.D. Ga. L.R. 41.1(c); Taylor v. Augus..
More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
G.R. SMITH, Magistrate Judge.
After four months of post-answer inactivity (which violated a Court order, see doe. 3, and Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f)), the Court recently ordered plaintiff Tashiba Ransom to show cause no later than December 22, 2015 why this case should not be dismissed on abandonment grounds. Doe. 9. She never responded. This case, therefore, should be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); S.D. Ga. L.R. 41.1(c); Taylor v. Augusta-Richmond Gty. Consol. Comm'rs, 618 F. App'x 651, 651 (11th Cir. 2015) (affirming dismissal under Local Rule 41.1(b) for failure to comply with this Court's order requiring pro se plaintiff to respond to a motion to dismiss); Betty K Agencies, Ltd. v. MY Monada, 432 F.3d 1333, 1337 (11th Cir. 2005) (district courts may sua sponte dismiss an action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) if the plaintiff fails to comply with court rules or a court order); Donaldson v. Clark, 819 F.2d 1551, 1557 n. 6 (11th Cir. 1987) (district court has inherent authority to sanction parties for "violations of procedural rules or court orders," up to and including dismissals with prejudice).
SO REPORTED AND RECOMMENDED.
Source: Leagle
