Williams v. Mallard

Filing 4

ORDERED that within 14 days of the date this order is served, plaintiff shall show cause why this case should not be dismissed on inactivity, ( Compliance due by 6/23/2017.) Signed by Magistrate Judge G. R. Smith on 6/9/17. (wwp)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SAVANNAH DIVISION
GRADY RENARD WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff,
v.
RICHARD A. MALLARD,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CV417-090

ORDER
Petitioner Grady Williams filed his civil rights action against
Effingham County District Attorney Richard Mallard without either a
filing fee or a properly completed motion to proceed in forma pauperis
(IFP). Doc. 1. On May 18, 2017, the Clerk of Court notified Williams of
that deficiency and provided him with a blank IFP form. Doc. 2. On
May 22, 2017, in lieu of returning payment or an IFP request, Williams
filed an “international promissory note” for $400, in “settlement of [his]
retail agreement[ ]” with the Court. Doc. 3. This is not his first attempt
to stymie the Court’s fee requirements. See, e.g., Williams v. Bryson,
No. CV416-334 at doc. 3 (filing a “notice” of an “ecclesiastical deed poll
. . . for discharge in accordance with the law” “per curiam divina” in lieu
of paying his filing fee or filing a completed IFP form), doc. 6

(recommending dismissal of his “plainly frivolous” notice).

This

promissory note, too, is plainly frivolous.
Within 14 days of the date this Order is served, plaintiff shall show
cause why this case should not be dismissed on inactivity and, thus,
abandonment grounds. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); S.D. Ga. L.R. 41.1(c);
Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962) (courts have the
inherent authority to dismiss claims for lack of prosecution); Mingo v.
Sugar Cane Growers Co-op, 864 F.2d 101, 102 (11th Cir. 1989); Jones v.
Graham, 709 F.2d 1457, 1458 (11th Cir. 1983); Floyd v. United States,
CV491-277 (S.D. Ga. June 10, 1992).
SO ORDERED, this 9th day of June, 2017.

2