Vickie M. Stringer v. Kensington Publishing Corp.

Background

Vickie M. Stringer filed this action against Kensington Publishing Corp. on October 21, 2025, and proceeded without a lawyer. The court scheduled an initial pretrial conference for June 17, 2026. Stringer did not attend, so the court rescheduled the conference for June 25 and required the parties to appear in person.

The court warned Stringer that if she failed to attend the June 25 conference, she would have to explain in writing why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute or as a sanction for violating the court’s orders. Stringer submitted a letter expressing an intent to continue the case, so the court gave her one final opportunity to attend a conference, rescheduled for July 15, 2026. The court expressly warned that another failure to appear would result in dismissal. Stringer did not attend the July 15 conference either.

Court’s Analysis

The court applied Rule 41(b), which allows a court to dismiss an action when a plaintiff fails to prosecute or comply with court orders. It considered the duration of the noncompliance, Stringer’s notice that dismissal could result, possible prejudice to Kensington from further delay, the competing interests of docket management and a fair opportunity to be heard, and whether a less severe sanction had been considered.

The court found that Stringer had repeatedly been warned about the consequences of failing to attend. It also discussed statements in Stringer’s response to the court’s warning that the court viewed as dubious or possibly false, including her claim that the missed appearance was her first and that she was unaware of the scheduled hearing. The court noted that the record showed she had emailed defense counsel the day before the June 25 conference asking for hearing details and access links, and that she had already consented to electronic service in this case.

The court concluded that Stringer’s continued noncompliance delayed the proceedings and burdened both the court and Kensington. It stated that the case could not proceed without her participation and dismissed the case on the record at the July 15 conference.

Disposition

Judge Jesse M. Furman ordered that the case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The court chose dismissal without prejudice rather than dismissal with prejudice because Stringer was representing herself. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case. The court also stated that if Stringer tried to reopen or refile the action, Kensington could raise again whether monetary sanctions were warranted.