a district court has the power to dismiss an action for the plaintiff’s failure to comply with any court order
How later courts described this case
- a district court has the power to dismiss an action for the plaintiff’s 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
ANTHONY BROWN, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) No. 4:19-cv-2614-SRC
)
DEON KELLEY, et al., )
)
Defendants. )
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon review of the file. Plaintiff Anthony Brown initiated
this civil rights action while he was an inmate at the Phelps County Jail. He filed a motion seeking
leave to proceed without prepaying fees and costs, but he did not submit the inmate account
statement required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). On January 23, 2020, plaintiff filed a notice of
change of address with this Court, providing the address of a private residence. Additionally,
information from the Bureau of Prisons indicated that plaintiff had been released from custody.
On January 28, 2020, the Court entered an order directing plaintiff to either pay the $400
filing fee, or file an updated motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis that contained
information about his current finances. The Court cautioned plaintiff that his failure to timely
respond would result in the dismissal of this case, without prejudice and without further notice.
Plaintiff’s response was due on February 27, 2020. However, to date, plaintiff has neither
responded to the Court’s order, nor sought additional time to do so. Plaintiff was given meaningful
notice of what was expected and ample time to comply, and he was cautioned that dismissal may
result from his failure to timely comply. Therefore, the Court will dismiss this action at this time,
without prejudice, due to plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s January 28, 2020 order. See
Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); see also Brown v. Frey, 806 F.2d 801, 803-04 (8th Cir. 1986) (a district court
has the power to dismiss an action for the plaintiff’s failure to comply with any court order). The
Court will also deny as moot plaintiff's motion seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and
his motion seeking the appointment of counsel.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice. A separate
order of dismissal will be entered herewith.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis (ECF No. 2) is DENIED as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs Motion to Appoint Counsel (ECF No. 3) is
DENIED as moot.
Dated this 27th day of March, 2020.
eee fe. © □□
STEPHEN R. CLARK
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE