Jordan v. Louisville Metro Department of Corrections et al, No. 3:2007cv00669 - Document 5 (W.D. Ky. 2008)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM AND OPINION by Judge Charles R. Simpson, III on 12/10/08; for the reasons set forth, it appears that Plaintiff has abandoned any interest in prosecuting this case, the Court will dismiss the case by separate Order.cc:Plaintiff, pro se (SC)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT LOUISVILLE CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:07CV-P669-S RONALD L. JORDAN II PLAINTIFF v. LOUISVILLE METRO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al. DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff Ronald L. Jordan II filed four actions in this Court, each listing his address as the Louisville Metro Department of Corrections. The Court dismissed two of the more recently filed actions on October 27, 2008, as abandoned because orders from this Court were returned to the Court by the United States Postal Service marked Return to Sender - Inmate Not In Custody. See Civil Action Nos. 3:08CV-237-H and 3:08CV-297-H. Apparently, Plaintiff is no longer incarcerated at the Louisville Metro Department of Corrections, his address of record in all actions, and he has not advised the Court of any change in his address. Upon filing the instant action, however, Plaintiff assumed the responsibility to keep this Court advised of his current address and to litigate his claims actively. See Local Rule 5.2(d) ( All pro se litigants must provide written notice of a change of address to the clerk and to the opposing party or the opposing party s counsel. Failure to notify the Clerk of an address change may result in the dismissal of the litigant s case or other appropriate sanctions. ). Because Plaintiff has not provided any forwarding address to the Court, neither notices from this Court nor filings by Defendants can be served on him. In such situations, courts have an inherent power acting on their own initiative to clear their calendars of cases that have remained dormant because of the inaction or dilatoriness of the parties seeking relief. Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630 (1962). Because it appears to this Court that Plaintiff has abandoned any interest in prosecuting this case, the Court will dismiss the case by separate Order. Date: December 10, 2008 cc: Plaintiff, pro se 4411.005 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.