Skinner v. Faulkner County Sheriff's Department
ORDER DISMISSING CASE without prejudice for plaintiff's failure to comply with the Order of the Court. Signed by Judge G. Thomas Eisele on 12/12/08. (bkp)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JAMES SKINNER vs. CASE NO. 4:08-cv-00503 GTE DEFENDANT PLAINTIFF
FAULKNER COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT ORDE R
By Order dated September 15, the Court directed Plaintiff to file an Amended Complaint. The September 15th Order specifically advised Plaintiff that if he failed to comply with the Court's Order his case would be dismissed. At the Court's direction the Order (and other documents) were mailed to Plaintiff at his last known address by J.R. Buzbee. The Court indicated at that time that it was allowing Mr. Buzbee to withdraw as Plaintiff's counsel and that Plaintiff would have to pursue the action pro se, that is, represent himself. On October 20, 2008, United States Magistrate Judge Jerry Cavaneau entered an Order formally relieving J. R. Buzbee as Plaintiff's counsel. The October 20th Order noted that Plaintiff had not complied with the October 20th deadline. It is now December 12, 2008. Plaintiff has responded in any way to the Court's September 15th or October 20th Orders. This Court's Local Rules provide that "[i]f any communication from the Court to a pro se plaintiff is not responded to within thirty (30) days, the case may be dismissed without prejudice."1 As a result of the Plaintiff James Skinner's failure to respond to this Court's Order of
Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) of the Local Rules for the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas. 1
September 15, 2008, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT Plaintiff's Complaint be, and it is hereby, DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED this 12th day of December, 2008. _/s/Garnett Thomas Eisele__________ 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?