BROOKS v. HOUSTON COUNTY GEORGIA
ORDER ADOPTING 52 Report and Recommendations and GRANTING Gary's 49 motion to dismiss. Brookss claims against Gary are DISMISSED without prejudice. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE MARC THOMAS TREADWELL on 6/30/2017. (tlh)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
Warden CLINTON PERRY, et al.,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:15-CV-408 (MTT)
Defendant Gary moves to dismiss Plaintiff Brooks’s claims for failure to
prosecute, citing Brooks’s failure to respond to discovery requests and requests for
deposition dates. Docs. 49; 49-1 at 2-3. United States Magistrate Judge Stephen
Hyles ordered Brooks to respond, warning him that failure to respond might result in
dismissal. Doc. 50 at 3-4. Brooks failed to respond. The Magistrate Judge
recommends granting Gary’s motion. Doc. 52. Brooks has not objected and the time
for filing objections has expired.
The Court has carefully reviewed the Recommendation, and accepts and adopts
the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. The Court
finds of particular importance that Brooks has not filed anything in this case since May
2, 2016, when he notified the Court that he was no longer incarcerated in the Houston
County Detention Center and requested that mail be sent to a private address—1048
Chatham Street, Macon, Georgia 31202. Doc. 29. All subsequent documents have
been mailed to him at that address, but Brooks has not been heard from since. Some
mail sent by the Court to that address has been returned as undeliverable because the
house is vacant and Brooks left no forwarding address. Doc. 53. Brooks had the
obligation to keep the Court informed as to his address and obviously has not done so.
For these reasons, the Recommendation is ADOPTED. Gary’s motion to dismiss (Doc.
49) is GRANTED and Brooks’s claims against him are DISMISSED without prejudice.
SO ORDERED, this 30th day of June, 2017.
S/ Marc T. Treadwell
MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
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?