Spencer v. Sullivan County Sheriff Department

Background

The court had previously dismissed all of Glynn Spencer’s claims against Sullivan County and some of his claims against Robert B. Cintron and Sgt. Starner. The court gave Spencer 30 days to file a second amended complaint, but he did not do so.

The court issued orders directing Spencer to explain why certain claims should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to pursue the case. Spencer did not file a second amended complaint or respond to those orders. On January 27, 2020, the court dismissed certain claims against Sullivan County, Starner, and Cintron for failure to prosecute.

The court later issued another order directing Spencer to explain why the entire case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Mail sent to the address listed for Spencer was returned as undeliverable. Because of concerns that Spencer might not have received the order during the COVID-19 pandemic, the court directed defense counsel to mail it again. Counsel reported that the mail was returned marked “Refused.” Spencer did not respond to any of the court’s orders to show cause and had not otherwise communicated with the court since filing an amended complaint on August 2, 2018.

Legal standard

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) allows a court to dismiss a case when a plaintiff fails to prosecute or fails to follow the rules or a court order. The court also recognized that a district court may dismiss a case on its own initiative for failure to prosecute, although dismissal is considered a harsh remedy reserved for extreme situations.

The court considered the factors used for this type of dismissal: the length of the plaintiff’s failures, whether the plaintiff was warned that continued delay could lead to dismissal, possible prejudice to the defendants, the balance between court congestion and the plaintiff’s opportunity to be heard, and whether lesser sanctions would be effective. No single factor controls.

Ruling

The court concluded that the factors favored dismissal. Spencer had been told that he needed to notify the court if his address changed and that failing to do so could result in dismissal. The repeated orders to show cause also warned that failing to respond could lead to dismissal without further notice.

Judge Kenneth M. Karas dismissed Spencer’s case without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The court directed defense counsel to mail a copy of the order to Spencer’s last known address and certify that the mailing occurred by September 15, 2020. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.