Opinion

Spears v. Francsis

Court
District Court, E.D. Missouri
Filed
Oct 4, 2021
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 24.1%

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 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

JERMAIN L. SPEARS, )

Plaintiff,

Vv. No. 4:21-CV-929 JAR

DANELL FRANCSIS, .

Defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court upon review of the file. Plaintiff Jermain Spears

commenced this civil action on July 28, 2021, by filing a handwritten Complaint brought under 42

U.S.C, § 1983 against Danell Francsis, Warden at Potosi Correctional Center. ECF No. 1.

However, Plaintiff neither paid the filing fee nor sought leave to proceed in forma pauperis, On

August 9, 2021, the Court entered an Order directing Plaintiff to either pay the filing fee or file a

motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis within thirty (30) days. ECF No. 2. The Court

cautioned Plaintiff that his failure to timely comply with the Order would result in the dismissal

of his case without further notice. Plaintiffs response was due by September 8, 2021.

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, 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 plaintiffs failure to comply with

the Court’s August 9, 2021 Order and his failure to prosecute his case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b);

see also Link vy. Wabash RR. 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 plaintiff's 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.

et

Dated this se day of October, 2021.

wi fe ue __—

D 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.