Opinion

Glaros v. Teachers Credit Union

Court
District Court, W.D. Arkansas
Filed
Sep 10, 2019
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 17.2%

stating that the district court possesses the power to dismiss sua sponte under Rule 41(b)

How later courts described this case

  • stating that the district court possesses the power to dismiss sua sponte under Rule 41(b)

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION

MELISSA ANN GLAROS PLAINTIFF

V. CASE NO. 5:19-cv-05151

TEACHERS CREDIT UNION; and

DOES 1-10 DEFENDANTS

OPINION AND ORDER

Plaintiff, Melissa Ann Glaros (“Glaros”), filed this action under the Fair Debt

Collection Practices Act. Glaros proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis.

By Order (Doc. 5) entered on August 7, 2019, Glaros was directed to file an

amended complaint. The amended complaint was to be filed by August 28, 2019.

Glaros was advised that failure to comply with the Order “shail result” in the dismissal of

the case. To date, Glaros has not filed an amended complaint. Glaros has not sought

an extension of time to comply with the Order. No mail has been returned as

undeliverable.

The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure specifically contemplate dismissal of a case

on the ground that the plaintiff failed to prosecute or failed to comply with an order of the

court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Line v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962)

(stating that the district court possesses the power to dismiss sua sponte under Rule

41(b)). Pursuant to Rule 41(b), a district court has the power to dismiss an action based

on “the plaintiff's failure to comply with any court order.” Brown v. Frey, 806 F.2d 801,

803-04 (Ath Cir 1986) (emprasis added). Additionally, Rule 5.5(c)(2\ of the Local Rulas

for the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas requires parties appearing pro se to

monitor the case, and to prosecute or defend the action diligently.

Therefore, pursuant to Rule 41(b), this Complaint should be and hereby is

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE based on Glaros’ failure to prosecute this case, her

failure to obey the order of the Court, and her failure to comply with Local Rule 5.5(c)(2).

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). fh

IT IS SO ORDERED on this _|2 ~ day of eerey pee

Tm wht ROOKS

UNITED*STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.