Opinion
7:19-cv-147 (WLS)
08-19-2021
CHRISTOPHER ALEXANDER, et al., Plaintiffs, v. SOUTHEAST CORRECTIONS, LLC, Defendant.
ORDER
W. LOUIS SANDS, SR. JUDGE
Plaintiff Christopher Alexander (“Alexander”) and others initiated this action on September 3, 2019, claiming defendant, Southeast Corrections, a private probation services provider in Colquitt County, Georgia, violated the Plaintiffs' rights in various ways as it supervised and enforced the terms of Plaintiffs' probationary sentences. (See generally Doc. 1.) Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on May 28, 2020 to include Plaintiff John T. Hitt (“Hitt”) among others. (Doc. 19.) All claims other than Plaintiff Hitt's and Plaintiff Alexander's have been resolved and settled upon successful mediation of the matter on April 27, 2021. (Doc. 39.)
According to Counsel for the Defendant the reason that Plaintiff Hitt's and Plaintiff Alexander's claims have yet to be resolved is that Plaintiffs Hitt and Alexander ceased communicating with Plaintiff s counsel. Defendant states that Plaintiff s counsel has not been able to contact Hitt or Alexander in more than a year despite diligent efforts. Id. at 2-3. For this reason on July 7, 2021, Defendant asked that the Court dismiss Plaintiff Hitt and Plaintiff Alexander's claims with prejudice pursuant to Rules 37(d) and 41(b) “for their failure to respond to discovery, failure to attend a deposition, their failure to prosecute their claims, and for their failure to comply with the Federal rules of Civil Procedure.” Id., at 5.
The Court determined that a motion for sanction under Rule 37 was untimely as discovery closed months earlier. See Doc. 8 at 2 and Doc. 42.
This Court entered an order on August 4, 2021 ordering Hitt and Alexander to show cause by responding to the order no later than Monday, August 16, 2021 as to why their claims should not be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute. (Doc. 42.) Plaintiffs Hitt and Alexander were warned that failure to timely respond would result in the prompt dismissal of their claims with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b).
As Plaintiffs Hitt and Alexander have failed to respond to date their claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute. The clerk's office is DIRECTED to close this case.
SO ORDERED .