Nails v. Real Estate Services of Dothan, et al (MAG+), No. 1:2012cv00337 - Document 11 (M.D. Ala. 2012)

Court Description: ORDER that: 1. Plaintiff's objection 10 is OVERRULED; 2. the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge 9 is ADOPTED; and 3. this case is DISMISSED without prejudice due to Plaintiff's failure to pay the civil action filing fee within the time allowed by the court. A separate final judgment will be entered. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 6/5/2012. (jg, )

Download PDF
Nails v. Real Estate Services of Dothan, et al (MAG+) Doc. 11 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION ANGELA DENISE NAILS, Plaintiff, v. REAL ESTATE SERVICES OF DOTHAN and DAN WILLIAMS, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 1:12-CV-337-WKW ORDER On May 21, 2012, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation (Doc. # 9) regarding Plaintiff’s failure to pay the civil action filing fee. Plaintiff filed a timely objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation. (Doc # 10.) The court reviews de novo the portion of the Recommendation to which the objections apply. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff’s objection requests that Defendants be served even if she is not allowed to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. # 10, at 1.) However, Plaintiff does not address her failure to pay the required filing fee. Plaintiff has been given ample time to pay this fee and has failed to do so. Furthermore, it would be a waste of judicial resources to serve an action upon Defendants that is due to be dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to pay her filing fee. Dockets.Justia.com Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff’s objection (Doc. # 10) is OVERRULED; 2. the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 9) is ADOPTED; and 3. this case is DISMISSED without prejudice due to Plaintiff’s failure to pay the civil action filing fee within the time allowed by the court. A separate final judgment will be entered. DONE this 5th day of June, 2012. /s/ W. Keith Watkins CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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.