HORNSBY et al v. THOMASVILLE NOTEHOLDER LLC et al
Filing
19
ORDER memorializing Court's oral rulings of 11/25/2014. Case is dismissed without prejudice. Ordered by U.S. District Judge HUGH LAWSON on 11/26/2014. (nbp)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
VALDOSTA DIVISION
CRAIG HORNSBY and PRESTIGE
NISSAN, INC.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
Civil Action No. 7:14-CV-78 (HL)
THOMASVILLE NOTEHOLDER,
LLC, FLOWERS AUTOMOTIVE,
LLC, and DAVID FLOWERS,
Defendants.
ORDER
This order memorializes the Court’s rulings made during the telephone
conference held on November 25, 2014.
On October 27, 2014, the Court entered an order requiring Plaintiffs to file
a status report notifying the Court of the posture of the case and noting that
Plaintiffs had yet to serve Defendants with a copy of their complaint. Plaintiffs
submitted a letter on October 30, 2014, informing the Court of their intent to
move forward with the case and to serve Defendants. The parties confirmed
during the course of the telephone conference that Plaintiffs still have not served
Defendants.
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m), if a defendant is not served
within 120 days after the date the complaint is filed, the Court must dismiss the
action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made
within a specified time. Here, Plaintiffs initiated the case on May 21, 2014. (Doc.
1). Plaintiffs thereafter filed their Amended Complaint on July 24, 2014. (Doc. 7).
Plaintiffs served Defendants with neither the Complaint nor the Amended
Complaint. The Court has afforded Plaintiffs ample time to take the necessary
steps to serve Defendants, and Plaintiffs have failed to do so within the 120 day
requirement. Accordingly, the Court dismisses this case without prejudice.
SO ORDERED this 26th day of November, 2014.
s/ Hugh Lawson_______________
HUGH LAWSON, SENIOR JUDGE
aks
2
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?