Daly v. Woods (INMATE 2)
ORDER: it is ORDERED that the 4 Recommendation is ADOPTED, and that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice for Plf's failures to comply with the order of the court and to prosecute this action. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 6/11/2018. (wcl, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
THOMAS A. DALY,
WALTER WOODS, Warden,
CASE NO. 2:18-CV-235-WKW
On May 14, 2018, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation to which
no timely objections have been filed. (Doc. # 4.) Upon an independent review of
the record and upon consideration of the Recommendation, and in light of
Plaintiff’s complete failure to respond to court orders or to appear in this action
personally or by counsel,1 it is ORDERED that the Recommendation is
ADOPTED, and that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s
failures to comply with the order of the court and to prosecute this action.
Final judgment will be entered separately.
In federal court, parties “may plead and conduct their own cases personally or by
counsel.” 28 U.S.C. § 1654. “The right to appear pro se . . . is limited to parties conducting
‘their own cases,’ and does not extend to non-attorney parties representing the interests of
others.” FuQua v. Massey, 615 F. App’x 611, 612 (11th Cir. 2015) (quoting Devine v. Indian
River Cty. Sch. Bd., 121 F.3d 576, 581 (11th Cir. 1997), overruled in part on other grounds by
Winkelman ex rel. Winkelman v. Parma City Sch. Dist., 550 U.S. 516, 535 (2007)).
DONE this 11th day of June, 2018.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?