Crift v. Williams et al

Filing 20

ORDER giving pltf notice that unless he shows, within 14 days from the entry of this Order, good cause for his failure to serve Sheriff Cantrell, deft Cantrell will be dismissed from this action without prejudice. Signed by Chief Judge J. Leon Holmes on 4/12/12. (vjt)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION LAWRENCE CRIFT, JR. v. PLAINTIFFS No. 5:11CV00136 JLH JASON WILLIAMS, Individually and in his Official Capacity as Police Officer for the City of McGehee; JOEY MOORE, Individually and in his Official Capacity as Police Officer for the City of McGehee; and WADE CANTRELL, Individually and in his Official Capacity as Sheriff of Desha County DEFENDANTS ORDER This action was commenced by the filing of a complaint on May 25, 2011. Wade Cantrell, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Desha County, has not entered an appearance. It does not appear from the docket that he has ever been served with summons and complaint. Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides: If a defendant is not served within 120 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on motion or on its own after notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made within a specified time. But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must extend the time for service for an appropriate period. Pursuant to Rule 4(m), the Court hereby gives notice that it will dismiss the action as to Wade Cantrell, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Desha County, without prejudice, unless the plaintiff shows within fourteen days from the entry of this Order good cause for his failure to serve Sheriff Cantrell. IT IS SO ORDERED this 12th day of April, 2012. J. LEON HOLMES 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?