From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McLeod v. Baker

United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Tallahassee Division
Sep 23, 2009
CASE NO. 4:09-cv-00181-MP-WCS (N.D. Fla. Sep. 23, 2009)

Opinion

CASE NO. 4:09-cv-00181-MP-WCS.

September 23, 2009


ORDER


This matter is before the Court on Doc. 11, Report and Recommendation regarding the Complaint filed by Steven A. McLeod. The Magistrate Judge recommended that this case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to follow a court order. In an order filed July 6, 2009, Plaintiff was directed to file an amended complaint by August 6, 2009. Plaintiff was specifically warned that failure to comply would result in a recommendation that the case be dismissed. Plaintiff failed to comply, and instead "clearly stated he did not intend to amend the Complaint," (Doc. 12, p. 1) and the Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal.

A trial court has inherent power to dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to prosecute. Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 8 L.Ed.2d 734 (1962). Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b) authorizes a district court to dismiss an action for failure to obey a court order. Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 838 and cases cited (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 863 (1989). In his objections to the Report and Recommendation, however, Doc. 12, Plaintiff characterizes the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation as "patently erroneous" (Doc. 12, p. 1) and "totally and blatantly false." ( Ibid.) This Court disagrees. Plaintiff further threatens to complain about the Magistrate Judge to the Judicial Council of the U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit, pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C. Chapter 16. He is at liberty to do so.

The Magistrate Judge also granted Plaintiff the ability to show cause for his failure to respond to the July 6, 2009 order in an Objection to the Report and Recommendation. Instead, Plaintiff complained that the order is in violation of clearly established U.S. Supreme Court law. In the order, the Magistrate had required Plaintiff to file an amended Complaint on the proper form, as N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 5.1(J)(2) requires, and send a copy of the form to Plaintiff. That requirement is lawful. Reviewing de novo as for any Objection to a Report and Recommendation from a Magistrate, this Court finds no error of any kind in the Magistrate's analysis. Because Plaintiff failed timely to respond to the Magistrate's July 6, 2009 order, and because that failure has not been excused, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, Doc. 11, is ADOPTED and incorporated herein.
2. This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with a court order.
DONE AND ORDERED.


Summaries of

McLeod v. Baker

United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Tallahassee Division
Sep 23, 2009
CASE NO. 4:09-cv-00181-MP-WCS (N.D. Fla. Sep. 23, 2009)
Case details for

McLeod v. Baker

Case Details

Full title:STEVEN A McLEOD, Plaintiff, v. BAKER, DAMIEN BUTLER, CHARLES J CRIST, JR…

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Tallahassee Division

Date published: Sep 23, 2009

Citations

CASE NO. 4:09-cv-00181-MP-WCS (N.D. Fla. Sep. 23, 2009)

Citing Cases

Rhode Island Hospital Trust Company v. Noyes

, the decisions of the courts upon the rules of construction applicable in similar cases, as well as of the…