Jackson v. Frazier et al (INMATE 1)CONSENT

Filing 32

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Honorable Judge Terry F. Moorer on 4/2/2013. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist)(jg, )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
ANTHONY JACKSON, #245389,
Plaintiff,
v.
GELET FRAZIER, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 2:12-CV-953-TFM
[WO]

MEMORANDUM OPINION
Anthony Jackson ["Jackson"], an indigent inmate, initiated this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action
challenging actions taken against him at the Frank Lee Work Release Center. The order of procedure
entered in this case specifically directed Jackson to immediately inform the court of any change in
his address. November 2, 2012 Order - Doc. No. 5 at 5.
On March 5, 2013, this court issued an order, a copy of which the Clerk mailed to Jackson.
The postal service returned this order because Jackson no longer resided at the address he last
provided to the court. In light of the foregoing, the court entered an order requiring that on or before
March 29, 2013 Jackson inform the court of his present address. March 19, 2013 Order - Doc. No.
30. The order specifically advised Jackson that this case could not proceed if his whereabouts
remained unknown and cautioned him that his failure to comply with its directives would result in
a Recommendation that this case be dismissed. Id. at 1. The court has received no response from
Jackson to the aforementioned order nor has he provided the court with his current address as
required by the order of procedure.
As is clear from the foregoing, Jackson has failed to comply with the directives of the orders

entered by this court. In addition, this case cannot properly proceed in his absence. It likewise
appears that Jackson is no longer interested in the prosecution of this case. The court therefore
concludes that this case is due to be dismissed. Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 837 (11th Cir.1989)
(As a general rule, where a litigant has been forewarned, dismissal for failure to obey a court order
is not an abuse of discretion.); see also Tanner v. Neal, 232 Fed. Appx. 924 (11th Cir.2007)
(affirming sua sponte dismissal without prejudice of inmate's § 1983 action for failure to file an
amended complaint in compliance with court's prior order directing amendment and warning of
consequences for failure to comply). Consequently, the court concludes that the plaintiff's failure
to comply with the orders of this court and his failure to properly prosecute this action warrant
dismissal of this case.
A separate order will accompany this memorandum opinion.
Done this 2nd day of April, 2013.

/s/Terry F. Moorer
TERRY F. MOORER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2