From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Taylor v. Augusta-Richmond Cnty. Consol. Comm'rs

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
Oct 7, 2015
618 F. App'x 651 (11th Cir. 2015)

Summary

affirming dismissal under Local Rule 41.1(b) for failure to comply with this Court's order requiring pro se plaintiff to respond to a motion to dismiss

Summary of this case from Ransom v. Chatham Cnty.

Opinion

No. 15-11751

10-07-2015

WARREN ADAM TAYLOR, Plaintiff-Appellant. v. AUGUSTA-RICHMOND COUNTY CONSOLIDATED COMMISSIONERS, et al., Defendants, J. PATRICK CLAIBORNE, Third Party Defendant, GWENDOLYN B. TAYLOR, Third Party Defendant-Appellee.


[DO NOT PUBLISH] Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 1:14-cv-00231-JRH-BKE Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia Before WILLIAM PRYOR, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

Warren Taylor appeals pro se the dismissal of his complaint about violations of his civil rights, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Act, id. § 12101, et seq., by his former wife, Gwendolyn Taylor; her attorney, J. Patrick Claiborne; and officials of Augusta-Richmond County. The district court dismissed Taylor's complaint for failure to prosecute. We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion when it dismissed Taylor's complaint, even if the ruling was tantamount to a dismissal with prejudice. Taylor filed three requests for a judgment of default, despite being told repeatedly by the district court that none of the defendants were in default. Taylor failed to comply with the order of the district court to respond to a motion to dismiss his complaint, even after the district court sua sponte granted Taylor an extension of time. See Zocaras v. Castro, 465 F.3d 479, 483 (11th Cir. 2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Rather than respond to the motion to dismiss, Taylor objected to the denial of his request for a judgment of default and asked the district court to vacate and remand his action to this Court. And Taylor ignored the warnings of the district court that, pursuant to a local rule, S.D. Ga. Local R.41.1, it would dismiss his complaint for failure to prosecute if he willfully disobeyed or ignored the order to respond. See Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 837 (11th Cir. 1989). Dismissal was an appropriate remedy based on Taylor's delay and willful conduct.

We AFFIRM the dismissal of Taylor's complaint.


Summaries of

Taylor v. Augusta-Richmond Cnty. Consol. Comm'rs

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
Oct 7, 2015
618 F. App'x 651 (11th Cir. 2015)

affirming dismissal under Local Rule 41.1(b) for failure to comply with this Court's order requiring pro se plaintiff to respond to a motion to dismiss

Summary of this case from Ransom v. Chatham Cnty.
Case details for

Taylor v. Augusta-Richmond Cnty. Consol. Comm'rs

Case Details

Full title:WARREN ADAM TAYLOR, Plaintiff-Appellant. v. AUGUSTA-RICHMOND COUNTY…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Oct 7, 2015

Citations

618 F. App'x 651 (11th Cir. 2015)

Citing Cases

Ransom v. Chatham Cnty.

She never responded. This case, therefore, should be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b);…

Morales v. Berryhill

. Here, the undersigned recommends that Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b) for…