Massingill v. Wellstar Health System, Inc. et al
Filing
13
OPINION AND ORDER adopting 10 Magistrate Judge Janet F. Kings Final Report and Recommendation and dismissing this action without prejudice pursuant to Local Rule 41.3(A)(2) for failure to comply with a lawful order of the Court. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 8/15/16. (ddm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
DAVID LEE MASSINGILL,
Plaintiff,
v.
1:15-cv-2978-WSD
WELLSTAR HEALTH SYSTEM,
INC., DAVID ALLISON, KRISTEN
BETTS, and JULIA RICE-MOORE
Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Janet F. King’s Final
Report and Recommendation [10] (“R&R”), recommending this action be
dismissed without prejudice.
I.
BACKGROUND
August 24, 2015, Plaintiff David Lee Massingill (“Plaintiff”) filed an
application to proceed in forma pauperis [1] (“Application”). On August 26, 2015,
the Magistrate Judge granted Plaintiff’s Application, and mailed Plaintiff the forms
required to be submitted before the complaint can be served. The Magistrate Judge
ordered Plaintiff, within twenty days, to complete and return the forms. Plaintiff
was advised that failure to return the forms in a timely manner could result in
dismissal of the complaint. ([2]). Plaintiff failed to return the forms within the
time period allowed.
On September 23, 2015, the Magistrate Judge ordered Plaintiff to “show
cause in writing why he has not returned the forms as ordered, and return the forms
to the Clerk, within fourteen (14) days of the date of this order.”
(September 23, 2015, Order [6] (“Show Cause Order”) at 1). The Magistrate
Judge advised Plaintiff that failure to respond to the Show Cause Order and to
return the service forms, as ordered, “will result in a report and recommendation to
the District Court to dismiss the complaint in this action.” (Id. at 2). Plaintiff
failed to respond to the Show Cause Order or to return the service forms.
On October 28, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued her R&R. In it, she
recommends the Court dismiss this action for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the
Show Cause Order and his failure to return the forms required to serve the
complaint. Plaintiff did not file any objections to the R&R, and has not otherwise
taken any action in this matter.
II.
DISCUSSION
A.
Legal Standard
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and
recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate
2
judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams
v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983).
No party objects to the R&R, and the Court thus conducts a plain error review of
the record. See United States v. Slay, 714 F.2d 1093, 1095 (11th Cir. 1983).
B.
Analysis
Under Local Rule 41.3(A)(2), “[t]he court may, with or without notice to the
parties, dismiss a civil case for want of prosecution if: . . . [a] plaintiff . . . shall,
after notice, . . . fail or refuse to obey a lawful order of the court in the case.” L.R.
41.3(A)(2), NDGa.
Plaintiff failed to comply with the Show Cause Order after being advised
that failure to comply would result in a recommendation that the Court dismiss this
action. The Magistrate Judge recommends this action be dismissed for Plaintiff’s
failure to comply with the Court’s orders. The Court finds no plain error in these
findings and recommendation. Slay, 714 F.2d at 1095. Accordingly, this action is
dismissed pursuant to Local Rule 41.3(A)(2).
III.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Janet F. King’s Final
Report and Recommendation [10] is ADOPTED.
3
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE pursuant to Local Rule 41.3(A)(2) for failure to comply with a
lawful order of the Court.
SO ORDERED this 15th day of August, 2016.
4
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?