“[D]ismissal upon disregard of an order, especially where the litigant has been forewarned, generally is not an abuse of discretion.”
How later courts described this case
- “[D]ismissal upon disregard of an order, especially where the litigant has been forewarned, generally is not an abuse of discretion.”
- “The court may dismiss an action sua sponte under [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b)] for failure to prosecute or failure to obey a court order.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PENSACOLA DIVISION
BRENDA MAE BAKER,
Plaintiff,
v. Case No. 3:24cv618-TKW-HTC
OKALOOSA COUNTY
SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, et al.,
Defendants.
___________________________/
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On December 17, 2024, the Court ordered Plaintiff Brenda Mae Baker to,
within twenty-one days, file either an amended complaint on the Northern District
of Florida’s complaint form or a notice of voluntary dismissal. Doc. 5. The Court
also warned Baker that her failure to comply with the December 17 Order could
result in a recommendation of dismissal. Id. After Baker failed to comply within
the allotted time, the Court ordered her on January 7, 2025, to show cause within
fourteen days why this case should not be dismissed due to her failure to comply
with the December 17 Order. Doc. 6.
To date, Baker has not responded to the January 7 Order or complied with the
December 17 Order. Based on the foregoing, dismissal of this case is appropriate.
See Brown v. Tallahassee Police Dep’t, 205 F. App’x 802, 802 (11th Cir. 2006)
(“The court may dismiss an action sua sponte under [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
41(b)] for failure to prosecute or failure to obey a court order.”) (citations omitted);
Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 837 (11th Cir. 1989) (“[D]ismissal upon disregard
of an order, especially where the litigant has been forewarned, generally is not an
abuse of discretion.”) (citations omitted).
Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED:
1. That this case be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE due to Baker’s
failure to comply with Court orders.
2. That the Clerk close the file.
At Pensacola, Florida, this 28th day of January, 2024.
/s/ Hope Thai Cannon
HOPE THAI CANNON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
NOTICE TO THE PARTIES
Objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within
fourteen (14) days of the date of the Report and Recommendation. Any different
deadline that may appear on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only
and does not control. An objecting party must serve a copy of its objections upon
all other parties. A party who fails to object to the magistrate judge’s findings or
recommendations contained in a report and recommendation waives the right to
challenge on appeal the district court’s order based on the unobjected-to factual and
legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. Rule 3-1.