Hayes v. Lee County Sheriff's Office et al, No. 2:2018cv00776 - Document 9 (M.D. Fla. 2019)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Reginald Hayes' Complaint/Writ of Quo Warranto 1 is dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment accordingly, terminate any pending motions and deadlines, and close this file. Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 10/30/2019. (SLU)

Download PDF
Hayes v. Lee County Sheriff's Office et al Doc. 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION REGINALD HAYES, Authorized Agent, Third-party Defendant, Corporation, Property, Debtor Plaintiff, v. Case No.: 2:18-cv-776-FtM-38NPM LEE COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE, D. HENSON, FNU ROCKENBURG, D. RAWLINS, FNU TRULOCK, FNU BASS, UNKNOWN DEPUTIES and K. KOLLER, Defendants. / OPINION AND ORDER1 This matter is before the Court upon sua sponte review of the record. Plaintiff initiated this action by filing a Complaint/ Writ of Quo Warranto. (Doc. 1). Plaintiff did not accompany the filing of his Complaint by paying the Court’s filing fee or moving to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a), 1915 (a)(1). In the Court’s Standing Order, (Doc. 2 at ¶ 2), Plaintiff was cautioned that under M.D. Fla. Rule 1.03(e), he would have to pay the Court’s filing fee or move to proceed in forma pauperis or his case could be 1 Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users’ convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other websites, this Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their websites. The Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court. Dockets.Justia.com dismissed without further notice.2 The Standing Order was mailed to Plaintiff, however; the Standing Order was returned as undeliverable by the United States Post Office. Plaintiff has an obligation to keep the Court advised of his current address, and he was warned that failure to do so would cause the dismissal of his case without further notice. (Doc. 2 at ¶ 6). On September 18, 2019, the Court directed Plaintiff to show cause why he violated the Court’s Standing Orders. (Doc. 8). Plaintiff was again cautioned that his case could be dismissed if he did not pay the Court’s filing fee or move to proceed in forma pauperis, as well as advise the Court of a change in address. (Doc. 8 at 1). To date, Plaintiff has not responded, paid the Court’s filing fee, moved to proceed in forma pauperis, or advised the Court of a change in address. The Court has taken reasonable steps to provide Plaintiff an opportunity to respond to the Court’s Orders and Plaintiff was put on notice that his case would be dismissed if he failed to comply. The Local Rules of this Court provide that “[w]henever it appears that any case is not being diligently prosecuted the Court may, on motion of any party or on its own motion, enter an order to show cause why the case should not be dismissed, and if no satisfactory cause is shown, the case may be dismissed by the Court for want of prosecution.” M.D. Fla. R. 3.10(a). The Local Rule reads: “[a] prisoner case will be subject to dismissal by the Court, sua sponte, if the filing fee is not paid or if the application [to proceed in forma pauperis] is not filed within 30 days of the commencement of the action.” M.D. Fla. Rule 1.03(e). 2 2 The Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to prosecute this case and that the case is due to be dismissed. Because the Court is dismissing this action without prejudice, Plaintiff may file a new complaint if he wishes to pursue his claim. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: 1. Plaintiff Reginald Hayes’ Complaint/ Writ of Quo Warranto (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice. 2. The Clerk of Court shall enter judgment accordingly, terminate any pending motions and deadlines, and close the file. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 30th day of October 2019. SA: FTMP-2 Copies: All Parties of Record 3

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.