Wright v. Warren County Sheriff's Department

Filing 9

MEMORANDUM OPINION: This action will be DISMISSED for want of prosecution. 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. AN APPROPRIATE JUDGMENT ORDER WILL ENTER. Signed by District Judge Harry S Mattice, Jr on 1/12/2017. (BJL,)Mailed to Michael A. Wright, Jr. Modified on 1/13/2017 (BJL,).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
AT WINCHESTER
MICHAEL A. WRIGHT, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v.
WARREN COUNTY,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No.: 4:16-CV-89-HSM-CHS

MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is a pro se prisoner’s complaint for violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On December 21,
2016, the Court entered an order granting Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis and
dismissing all claims in the complaint except Plaintiff’s claim that his legal mail had been
opened [Doc. 7]. The mail sent to Plaintiff with that order was returned as undeliverable, with a
handwritten note on the envelope stating “RTS – NOT HERE” [Doc. 8 p. 1] and Plaintiff has not
otherwise communicated with the Court. It is therefore 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 Defendants can communicate with him regarding his case.
Accordingly, this action will be DISMISSED 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. 01229234, 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.
AN APPROPRIATE JUDGMENT ORDER WILL ENTER.
ENTER:

/s/ Harry S. Mattice, Jr._______
HARRY S. MATTICE, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE