the authority of a court to dismiss sua sponte for lack of prosecution is inherent power governed “by the control necessarily vested in courts to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases’’
How later courts described this case
- the authority of a court to dismiss sua sponte for lack of prosecution is inherent power governed “by the control necessarily vested in courts to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases’’
- a district court has the power to dismiss an action for the plaintiffs failure to comply with any court order
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
KEITH E. BROWN EL, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) No. 4:19-CV-990 NCC
)
DENISE WEAVER, et al., )
)
Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon review of the file. On April 24, 2019,
plaintiff Keith E. Brown El filed this action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
However, plaintiff’s pro se complaint was not drafted on a Court-provided form and
plaintiff neither paid the filing fee nor submitted a motion to proceed without
prepaying fees or costs. On May 14, 2019, the Court ordered plaintiff to file an
amended complaint on the Court-provided form, and to either pay the $400 filing
fee or submit a motion to proceed without prepaying fees or costs. ECF No. 3.
Plaintiff requested, and was granted, two extensions of the deadline to comply with
the Court’s May 14, 2019, Order. ECF Nos. 6 &11. Plaintiff’s response was due by
August 29, 2019.
To date, plaintiff has filed nothing responsive to the Court’s May 14, 2019,
Order. Nor has plaintiff sought a third extension of time to do so. Plaintiff was
given meaningful notice of what was expected, he was cautioned that his case would
be dismissed if he failed to timely comply, and he was given ample time to comply.
The Court will therefore dismiss this action, without prejudice, due to plaintiff’s
failure to comply with the Court’s May 14, 2019, Order and his failure to prosecute
his case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); see also Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626,
630-31 (1962) (the authority of a court to dismiss sua sponte for lack of prosecution
is inherent power governed “by the control necessarily vested in courts to manage
their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases’’);
Brown v. Frey, 806 F.2d 801, 803 (8th Cir. 1986) (a district court has the power to
dismiss an action for the plaintiffs failure to comply with any court order).
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED without
prejudice. A separate order of dismissal will be entered herewith.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that an appeal from this dismissal would not
be taken in good faith.
Dated this 9th day of September, 2019.
CATHERINE D.PERRY //
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE