Christian v. McMahan Ford et al

Filing 157

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff shall SHOW CAUSE no later than December 29, 2014, why his case should not be dismissed for failure to comply with this Courts orders. Show Cause Response due by 12/29/2014.. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 12/18/14. (CSG)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

FRED CHRISTIAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
MCMAHON FORD, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 4:14-cv-454 SNLJ

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Currently before the Court are defendants’ Motion for Sanctions (#131) and
Motions to Dismiss (#150, #152). On September 12 and 19, 2014, this Court ordered
plaintiff to respond to defendants’ discovery requests and fulfill his discovery obligations
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a)(1) no later than September 29, 2014. This
Court warned that failure to comply could result in sanctions, including dismissal of his
case and imposition of attorneys’ fees and expenses. Plaintiff sought and received an
extension of time by which to comply to October 1, 2014. 1 Defendants filed their latest
motion to dismiss on October 3 because plaintiff had failed to file his responses by that
time. In the meantime, plaintiff had requested that counsel be appointed for him on
September 22. That motion was denied September 25. Defendants state that plaintiff
emailed defense counsel on October 2, said he was working on his responses and would
provide them by October 6. However, plaintiff did not move the Court for another

1

Plaintiff also suggested that he was being treated unfairly with respect to discovery procedures.
1

extension, nor did he offer any explanation for violating this Court’s orders, nor did he
even serve his responses on October 6 as promised. Finally, on October 7, 2014, plaintiff
filed with the Court his discovery responses. Plaintiff did not seek leave to serve his
responses out of time or even offer an excuse for his failure to comply with the Court’s
order.
Plaintiff’s discovery responses were due on May 21, 2014. He represented to
defense counsel that he would not sit for a deposition or response to written discovery until
he was appointed counsel, even though his repeated requests for counsel were denied.
Rather than comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or this Court’s orders in a
timely fashion, plaintiff has filed repeated requests for counsel and interlocutory appeals
with the Eighth Circuit. The Court observes that the rudimentary responses that were
ultimately and belatedly filed by plaintiff do not suggest plaintiff had any difficulty
completing them.
Because plaintiff is pro se, the Court will permit plaintiff one last chance to show
cause why his case should not be dismissed for failure to comply with the Court’s orders.
Plaintiff must include explanation for why he failed to answer discover requests (or
otherwise comply with discovery obligations) in a timely manner. Failure to comply with
this Order will result in dismissal of this case.

2

Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff shall SHOW CAUSE no later than
December 29, 2014, why his case should not be dismissed for failure to comply with this
Court’s orders.

Dated this

18th

day of December, 2014.

_________________________________
STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3