Johnson v. State of Tennessee
Filing
4
MEMORANDUM OPINION in support of the following Judgment Order. Signed by Chief District Judge Thomas A Varlan on 6/26/15. (c/m)(ADA)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
AT KNOXVILLE
MARCUS JOHNSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
STATE OF TENNESSEE,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No.: 3:15-CV-212-TAV-HBG
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is a prisoner’s pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. §1983. This matter
is before the Court upon the postal return of an order the Court mailed to plaintiff at the
address he listed as his current address in his complaint. The postal authorities returned
the mail to the Court more than ten days ago with the envelope marked “RTS, Refused,
Unable to Forward” [Doc. 3 p. 1]. Accordingly, it is clear that plaintiff has failed to
provide the Court with notice of his correct address and, without his correct and current
address, neither the Court nor defendant can communicate with him regarding his case.
Accordingly, this action will be DISMISSED, sua sponte, for failure to follow
orders of this Court and for want of prosecution. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Link v. Wabash R.
Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962) (recognizing court’s authority to dismiss a case sua
sponte for lack of prosecution); White v. City of Grand Rapids, No. 01-229234, 34
F.App’x 210, 211, 2002 WL 926998, at *1 (6th Cir. May 7, 2002) (finding that pro se
prisoner’s complaint “was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution because he failed
to keep the district court apprised of his current address”); Jourdan v. Jabe, 951 F.2d 108
(6th Cir. 1991).
The Court CERTIFIES that any appeal from this action would not be taken in
good faith and would be totally frivolous. See Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Appellate
Procedure.
A separate judgment will enter.
ENTER:
s/ Thomas A. Varlan
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?