a district court has the power to dismiss an action for the plaintiffs 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 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
KAREN TATUM JONES, )
Plaintiff,
V. No. 4:19-cv-3315-SNLJ
CARIANNE LARISSA NOGA, et al.,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon review of the file. For the reasons explained below,
this case will be dismissed pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Plaintiff initiated this case on December 20, 2019, and filed a motion for leave to proceed
in forma pauperis. The Court granted the motion and reviewed the complaint pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), and determined that it was subject to dismissal. On April 23, 2020, the
Court entered an order directing plaintiff to file an amended complaint to cure the defects. In the
order, the Court clearly explained why the complaint was subject to dismissal, gave plaintiff
clear instructions about how to prepare the amended complaint, and cautioned her that her failure
to timely comply with the order would result in the dismissal of her case without further notice.
Plaintiff's response was due to the Court on May 26, 2020. To date, however, she has
neither responded to the Court’s order, nor sought additional time to do so. The Court gave
plaintiff meaningful notice of what was expected, cautioned her that her case would be dismissed
if she failed to timely comply, and gave her significant additional time to comply. Therefore, this
action will be dismissed without prejudice due to plaintiff's failure to comply with this Court’s
April 23, 2020 order and her failure to prosecute her case. 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 plaintiffs failure to comply with any court order); Dudley v. Miles, 597 F. App’x
392 (8th Cir. 2015) (per curiam) (affirming dismissal without prejudice where pro se plaintiff
failed to file an amended complaint despite being cautioned that dismissal could result from
failure to do so).
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. A .
separate order of dismissal will be entered herewith.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED than an appeal from this dismissal would not be taken in
good faith.
Dated this Fete day of June, 2020.
STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2 .