Brown v. Weber
- Nelson Roman
- 7:18-cv-09618-NSR
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Brown v. Webber, Judge Roman dismissed the negligence action without prejudice because the plaintiffs failed to prosecute it.
Rasha Brown and Lloyd Watson’s negligence action against Terrance Webber and Stevens Transport, Inc. was dismissed without prejudice; the court directed that the case be terminated.
What happened
Rasha Brown and Lloyd Watson sued Terrance Webber and Stevens Transport, Inc., asserting negligence claims. The case was transferred from the Eastern District of New York to the Southern District of New York.
The plaintiffs took little action after filing the complaint and did not respond to the court’s order directing them to explain why the case should not be dismissed. The court found that their delay was significant and that they had not communicated with the court for more than two years.
The court dismissed the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute and directed the clerk to close the case. The order was issued by United States District Judge Nelson S. Roman.
The detailed version
- Brown v. Weber · No. 7:18-cv-09618-NSR
- Nelson Roman
- Oct. 26, 2020
Background
Rasha Brown and Lloyd Watson brought negligence claims against Terrance Webber and Stevens Transport, Inc. The complaint was filed in April 2018 in the Eastern District of New York and was later transferred to the Southern District of New York.
Failure to Prosecute
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), a court may dismiss an action when a plaintiff fails to move the case forward. The court had issued an order to show cause on March 6, 2020, directing the plaintiffs to explain by April 6, 2020, why the case should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The plaintiffs did not respond.
The court considered the factors used for a Rule 41(b) dismissal, including the length of the delay, whether the plaintiffs received notice that continued delay could lead to dismissal, possible prejudice to the defendants, the court’s need to manage its calendar while preserving the plaintiffs’ opportunity to be heard, and whether lesser sanctions would be effective. The court emphasized that the plaintiffs had taken little action since filing the complaint and had not communicated with the court since April 2018.
Ruling
Judge Nelson S. Roman ordered that the action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The clerk was directed to terminate the action and serve the order on the plaintiffs’ counsel. The opinion did not decide the merits of the negligence claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.