Opinion

Smith v. Ross

Court
District Court, E.D. Missouri
Filed
Jul 8, 2020
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 24.0%

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

SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION

BYRON TERRELL SMITH, SR., )

Plaintiff,

V. No. 1:20-cv-62 JMB

AMY ROSS,

Defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court upon review of the file. Plaintiff, proceeding pro se,

initiated this case on March 25, 2020, 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).

As fully explained in the Court’s May 18, 2020 order, the complaint was subject to dismissal

because it failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted against the defendant. The

Court gave plaintiff the opportunity to file an amended complaint to cure the defects. In doing so,

the Court clearly explained why the complaint was subject to dismissal, gave plaintiff clear

instructions about how to prepare the amended complaint, and cautioned him that his failure to

timely comply with the order would result in the dismissal of his case without further notice.

Plaintiff's response was due to the Court on June 17, 2020. To date, however, he has

neither complied with the Court’s order, nor sought additional time to do so. The Court gave

plaintiff meaningful notice of what was expected, cautioned him that his case would be

dismissed if he failed to timely comply, and gave him significant additional time to comply.

Therefore, the Court will dismiss this action at this time without prejudice due to plaintiffs

failure to comply with the Court’s May 18, 2020 order and his failure to prosecute his 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 plaintiff's 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 SoH day of July, 2020.

RONNIE L. WHITE

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.