From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lee v. Butler & Assocs.

United States District Court, District of Kansas
Jun 29, 2022
No. 22-3090-SAC (D. Kan. Jun. 29, 2022)

Opinion

22-3090-SAC

06-29-2022

CLEVELAND LAVELL LEE, Plaintiff, v. BUTLER & ASSOCIATES, P.A., et al., Defendants.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

SAM A. CROW U.S. SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Plaintiff Cleveland Lavell Lee is a state prisoner housed at Lansing Correctional Facility in Lansing, Kansas. Plaintiff filed this § 1983 action against Butler & Associates, P.A.; David M. Braun, Zachary A. King, and Kansas District Judge Robert J. Flemings, alleging that they participated in an illegal scheme to extort or embezzle money from him.

The Court entered an Order (Doc. 4) denying Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis, finding Plaintiff is subject to the “three-strikes” provision under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Court examined the complaint and attachments and found no showing of imminent danger of serious physical injury. The Court also granted Plaintiff until June 13, 2022, to submit the $402.00 filing fee. The Court's order provided that “[t]he failure to submit the fee by that date will result in the dismissal of this matter without prejudice and without additional prior notice.” (Doc. 4, at 2.) Two weeks have passed since the deadline set forth in the order and Plaintiff has failed to pay the full $402.00 filing fee.

Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure “authorizes a district court, upon a defendant's motion, to order the dismissal of an action for failure to prosecute or for failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or ‘a court order.” Young v. U.S., 316 Fed.Appx. 764, 771 (10th Cir. 2009) (citing Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b)). “This rule has been interpreted as permitting district courts to dismiss actions sua sponte when one of these conditions is met.” Id. (citing Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962); Olsen v. Mapes, 333 F.3d 1199, 1204 n.3 (10th Cir. 2003)). “In addition, it is well established in this circuit that a district court is not obligated to follow any particular procedures when dismissing an action without prejudice under Rule 41(b).” Young, 316 Fed.Appx. at 771-72 (citations omitted).

The time in which Plaintiff was required to submit the filing fee has passed without Plaintiff doing so. As a consequence, the Court dismisses this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) for failure to comply with court orders.

IT IS THEREFORE BY THE COURT ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Lee v. Butler & Assocs.

United States District Court, District of Kansas
Jun 29, 2022
No. 22-3090-SAC (D. Kan. Jun. 29, 2022)
Case details for

Lee v. Butler & Assocs.

Case Details

Full title:CLEVELAND LAVELL LEE, Plaintiff, v. BUTLER & ASSOCIATES, P.A., et al.…

Court:United States District Court, District of Kansas

Date published: Jun 29, 2022

Citations

No. 22-3090-SAC (D. Kan. Jun. 29, 2022)