# Williams v. State of Missouri

> District Court, E.D. Missouri · May 22, 2025

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11056827

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, E.D. Missouri
- **Decided:** May 22, 2025
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11056827

## Opinion text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
NORTHERN DIVISION

BRAYON WILLIAMS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) No. 2:25-cv-00023-SRW
)
STATE OF MISSOURI, et al., )
)
Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court upon review of the file. Plaintiff Brayon Williams
commenced this civil action in February 2025, alleging violations of his civil rights at Fulton
Reception & Diagnostic Center, a Missouri Department of Corrections institution. ECF No. 1.
On April 3, 2025, the Court directed Plaintiff to file an amended complaint on a Court-provided
form, and to file a certified prison account statement in support of his motion to proceed without
prepayment of fees and costs. ECF No. 3. The Court cautioned Plaintiff that his failure to timely
comply with the Order would result in the dismissal of the case without further notice. Id. at 2.
Plaintiff’s response was due by May 5, 2025.
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 Plaintiff’s failure to comply with
the Court’s April 3, 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 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 FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis [ECF No. 2] is DENIED as moot.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that an appeal from this dismissal would not be taken in
good faith.
Dated this 22nd day of May, 2025.
oe ey
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/11056827. Public record. Not legal advice.