Opinion
00 C 50250
July 24, 2001
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiffs Diana Chapman, Carolyn Crawley, Tina Garrett, Paul Golden, Doris Heibner, Minnie Isom, Bobbie Renner and Mary J. Spence filed a complaint against Daimler-ChrySler Corporation ("DaimlerChrysler") and the International Union of the United Auto Workers Local Union 1268 on July 12, 2000. On March 21, 2001, plaintiffs Carolyn Crawley, Paul Golden, Tina Garrett and Bobbie Renner petitioned for the withdrawal of Robert Sharp, Jr. as their attorney. The Magistrate Judge granted their petition, and ordered the individual plaintiffs or their retained counsel to appear at the initial pretrial 4 conference set for April 11, 2001 or their causes would be dismissed for want of prosecution. A copy of the Order was sent to the individual plaintiffs' addresses.
On April 11, 2001, neither Tina Garrett or Carolyn Crawley nor attorneys on their behalf appeared as ordered. At that time, the Magistrate Judge entered an order stating that all non-represented plaintiffs or their counsel were to appear on May 16, 2001 or their case would be dismissed for want of prosecution. On May 16, 2001, Garrett and Crawley did not appear, and the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation dismissing their claims for want of prosecution. Crawley filed an objection to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation of May 16, 2001; Garrett did not. Although Crawley does not directly address why she did not appear in court on April 11, 2001, or May 16, 2001, it appears she may have been confused about the status of her case, based on a conversation with her former attorney. Crawley's objection is allowed and her claims in this case are reinstated, but the court expects Crawley to show up and participate in the litigation of this case, either in person or through an attorney hired by her, or her claims will be dismissed. The next court date is September 28, 2001 at 1:30 p.m., and Crawley, either in person or through an attorney she hires, is expected to be there, otherwise her claim will be dismissed. The court adopts the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge dated May 16, 2001 as to plaintiff Garrett, and her claims are dismissed with prejudice for want of prosecution. See Rule 41(b).
Plaintiff Crawley refers to herself as Crawley-Guerin in her objection. However, for purposes of consistency, the court will refer to her as "Crawley," which is how her name appears in the caption.
On June 27, 2001, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation that Golden be dismissed for want of prosecution for failure to appear. No objections have been filed, and the court adopts the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge dated June 27, 2001, and Golden's claims are dismissed with prejudice for want of prosecution.