Baptiste v. Sommers, No. 13-3079 (2d Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CasePlaintiff filed suit pro se alleging that he received inadequate medical care while he was in a federal corrections facility. The district court dismissed the case for failure to prosecute. A district court considering a Rule 42(b) dismissal must weigh five factors: the duration of plaintiff's failure to comply with the court order; whether plaintiff was on notice that failure to comply would result in dismissal; whether defendants are likely to be prejudiced by further delay in the proceedings; a balancing of the court's interest in managing its docket with the plaintiff's interest in receiving a fair chance to be heard; and whether the judge has adequately considered a sanction less drastic than dismissal. In this case, the district court's order did not refer to any of the five factors relevant to the Rule 41(b) dismissal. The district court erred by failing to address the factors and, had it done so, the district court would not have dismissed the case. Accordingly, the court vacated and remanded for further proceedings.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.