Johnson et al v. Flakeboard America Limited

Filing 97

ORDER: No later than October 19, 2012, Seabury is to contact the Clerk of Court in writing to inform the court of his position on Counsel's Motion 86 and whether he wishes to continue to be a Plaintiff in this matter. Seabury is specifically advised that, should he fail to respond adequately to the court by October 19, 2012, Counsel's Motion will be granted. Further, should Seabury fail to respond adequately, the undersigned may recommend that he be dismissed from this case as a Plaintiff, thereby ending his case with prejudice for failure to prosecute. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kaymani D West on 10/10/2012. (mcot, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FLORENCE DIVISION
JULIA JOHNSON, JAMES ALLEN
SANDERS, PAUL SEABURY,
MATTHEW SINCLAIR, CATHY
WILLIAMS, KENDRICKS DOUGLAS,
TAMMY MCCALL AND BARRY
ALFORD
Individually and on behalf of the class they
seek to represent,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
FLAKEBOARD AMERICA LIMITED,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A No. 4:11-2607-TLW-KDW

ORDER
ACTION REQUIRED BY
PLAINTIFF PAUL SEABURY

This matter is before the court on Plaintiffs’ Counsel’s Motion to Withdraw from
Representation of Plaintiff Paul Seabury (“Motion”), in which Plaintiffs’ Counsel
(“Counsel”) represents that, despite repeated requests by Counsel, Seabury has failed to
communicate with Counsel. ECF No. 86. Counsel filed the Motion on August 31, 2012,
indicating a copy of the Motion was mailed to Seabury on the same date. Id. ¶ 5. Seabury did
not file a response to the Motion.1
On September 25, 2012, the court noticed a hearing on the Motion to begin at 10:00
a.m. on October 10, 2012. ECF No. 88. As instructed by the court, Counsel provided the
Clerk of Court with Seabury’s last known mailing address and telephone number. A copy of
the Notice of Hearing (“Notice)”) was sent to Seabury’s last known address by regular and
by certified mail, ECF No. 91, and Seabury acknowledged receipt of the Notice that was sent
by certified mail, ECF No. 93. The Notice instructed Seabury to inform Counsel of a
1

Defendants do not object to the Motion. See ECF No. 86 ¶ 4.

telephone number where he could be reached at the time of the October 10, 2012 hearing so
that he could participate in that hearing. ECF No. 88. However, Seabury did not contact
Counsel as instructed.
The court convened the October 10, 2012 telephone hearing, with Counsel and
defense counsel participating. Seabury did not participate, and the court is unaware of any
attempt made by Seabury to contact the court or to otherwise arrange to participate in the
hearing. Nonetheless, before ruling on Counsel’s Motion, the court issues this Order
instructing Seabury to respond no later than October 19, 2012.
No later than October 19, 2012, Seabury is to contact the Clerk of Court in writing
at the address provided below to inform the court of his position on Counsel’s Motion and
whether he wishes to continue to be a Plaintiff in this matter. To that end, Seabury is to
advise which ONE of the following options regarding his participation in this action he
prefers:
(a) That he does not wish to continue to prosecute this matter and seeks to withdraw
as a Plaintiff;
(b) That he wishes to continue to prosecute this matter and has obtained other
counsel;
(c) That he wishes to continue to prosecute this matter and will cooperate with his
current Counsel; or
(d) That he wishes to continue to prosecute this matter and will represent himself.
Seabury is to provide this information by mailing a document to the Clerk of Court, Post
Office Box 2317, Florence, South Carolina 29503, that also includes the civil action number
listed above (C/A No. 4:11-2607-TLW-KDW). Seabury is specifically advised that, should

2

he fail to respond adequately to the court by October 19, 2012, Counsel’s Motion will be
granted. Further, should Seabury fail to respond adequately, the undersigned may
recommend that he be dismissed from this case as a Plaintiff, thereby ending his case with
prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Davis v. Williams, 588 F.2d 69, 70 (4th Cir. 1978);
Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
The Clerk of Court is ordered to send a copy of this Order to Seabury at his last
known address by certified mail and by regular mail.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

October 10, 2012
Florence, South Carolina

Kaymani D. West
United States Magistrate Judge

3