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
SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION
ROBERT TAYLOR, )
)
Petitioner, )
)
vs. ) No. 1:25-cv-00043-SRW
)
STE. GENEVIEVE COUNTY JAIL, )
)
Respondent. )
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Petitioner Robert Taylor has failed to comply with the Court’s Order dated March 12,
2025, requiring him to submit an amended petition on a Court-provided form, and to either pay
the $5 filing fee or submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 2. Local Rule 2.01
authorizes the Clerk of Court to refuse to receive any pleadings “until the applicable statutory fee
is paid, except in cases accompanied by a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis.”
E.D. Mo. L.R. 2.01(B)(1). The Court warned Petitioner that failure to comply with the Court’s
Order would result in dismissal of this action without prejudice and without further notice. ECF
No. 2 at 3. Petitioner’s response was due by April 11, 2025.
To date, Petitioner has neither responded to the Court’s Order, nor sought additional time
to do so. Petitioner 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 Petitioner’s failure to
comply with the Court’s March 12, 2025, Order and his failure to prosecute his case. See Fed. R.
Civ. P. 41(b); see also Link v. Wabash R.R. 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 vy. 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 action is DISMISSED without prejudice. See Fed.
R. Civ. P. 41(b). A separate order of dismissal will be entered herewith.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
Dated this 28th day of April, 2025.
. .
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE