Blackwell v. Bolin et al, No. 2:2020cv02174 - Document 10 (W.D. Ark. 2021)

Court Description: OPINION and ORDER re 1 Complaint filed by Alex Kearnell Blackwell. This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Judgment will be entered separately. Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes III on March 15, 2021. (jlm)

Download PDF
Blackwell v. Bolin et al Doc. 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FORT SMITH DIVISION ALEX KEARNELL BLACKWELL v. PLAINTIFF No. 2:20-CV-02174 KEVIN BOLIN, et al. DEFENDANTS OPINION AND ORDER On March 3, 2021, the Court entered an order (Doc. 9) directing Plaintiff to show cause why his complaint should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to obey Court orders. The deadline to respond was March 12, 2021, and no response was filed. The Court previously dismissed this action for failure to prosecute because Plaintiff failed to keep current the address on file in the Clerk’s office. The Court vacated that order, reminded Plaintiff of his obligation to comply with Court rules and orders, and then permitted him to proceed in forma pauperis. The order granting leave to proceed in forma pauperis also directed Plaintiff to use the form complaint provided by this Court to prisoners who bring pro se civil actions because that complaint helps clarify which claims are brought against which party. The copy of that order mailed to Plaintiff was returned undeliverable, and the returned mail indicated that Plaintiff had again moved and left no forwarding address. Plaintiff has twice failed to update his address with the Clerk and has refused to respond to either the order allowing him to proceed in forma pauperis or the Court’s order to show cause. If this conduct does not yet rise to the level of a pattern of deliberate disregard of Court orders, it approaches that level. Nevertheless, because “a dismissal with prejudice is a drastic remedy,” and in light of the posture of this case, a nonprejudicial dismissal is the more measured consequence for Plaintiff’s disregard. Burgs v. Sissel, 745 F.2d 526, 528 (8th Cir. 1984). 1 Dockets.Justia.com IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Judgement will be entered separately. IT IS SO ORDERED this 15th day of March, 2021. /s/P. K. Holmes, ΙΙΙ P.K. HOLMES, III U.S. 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.