Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 7, 2023

Campbell v. The Billiard Factory, Ltd.

Judge
James Oetken
Docket
1:22-cv-09795
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Campbell v. The Billiard Factory, Judge Oetken dismissed the action without prejudice after Campbell failed to prosecute or respond to a court order.

Who this affects

Jovan Campbell's action against The Billiard Factory, Ltd. was dismissed without prejudice, and the case was closed.

What happened

Jovan Campbell brought Campbell v. The Billiard Factory, Ltd. and served the defendant, which filed an answer denying most of the allegations. The case was brought on behalf of Campbell and others similarly situated.

The court ordered Campbell to explain why the case should not be dismissed for failing to prosecute, meaning failing to move the case forward. Campbell did not respond or take any action addressing that order.

Judge Oetken dismissed the action without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Campbell v. The Billiard Factory, Ltd. · No. 1:22-cv-09795
Judge
James Oetken
Date
Sept. 7, 2023

Background

Jovan Campbell filed the action on November 17, 2022, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated. The Billiard Factory, Ltd. was served on December 7, 2022, and filed an answer on January 10, 2023, substantially denying the complaint's allegations.

On August 29, 2023, the court ordered Campbell to explain within seven days why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Campbell did not take any action in response to that order.

Court's Analysis

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) permits a district court to dismiss an action when a plaintiff fails to prosecute the case or comply with a court order. The court stated that Campbell had been warned that further delay could result in dismissal and that the delay had been unreasonable. It concluded that dismissal without prejudice appropriately balanced managing the court's caseload with Campbell's right to notice and a fair opportunity to be heard.

Disposition

The action was dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.