Teague v. Light et al, No. 3:2008cv00182 - Document 18 (W.D. Ky. 2008)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM AND OPINION by Chief Judge John G. Heyburn, II on 9/23/08; Court to enter separate Order in accordance with this opinion.cc:Plaintiff, pro se, Defendants (SC)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT LOUISVILLE CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:08CV-P182-H JA-RON TEAGUE PLAINTIFF v. DOCTOR LIGHT DEFENDANT MEMORANDUM OPINION On or about March 31, 2008, unrepresented by counsel, Plaintiff filed a handwritten one page complaint/letter with the Court explaining that Defendants Drs. Light and Zellar were denying him mental health medications thereby seriously endangering his well-being. By Order entered August 18, 2008, the Court ordered Plaintiff to re-file his complaint on the Court approved form and to tender summonses for each named Defendant. In response, Plaintiff filled out the form listing Defendants as parties. In the statement-of-claim section of the complaint, however, Plaintiff did not describe Defendants actions. Accordingly, on September 5, 2008, the Court entered an Order directing Plaintiff to file an amended complaint or face dismissal. On September 11, 2008, the copy of the Order sent to Plaintiff was returned unopened by the United States Postal Service. The enveloped was marked, Return to Sender-Inmate Not In Custody (DN 17). Upon filing the instant action, Plaintiff assumed the responsibility to keep this Court advised of his current address and to litigate his claims actively. See LR 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. ). Apparently, Plaintiff is no longer incarcerated, and he has not advised the Court of any change in his address. Because neither notices from this Court nor filings by Defendants in this action can be served on Plaintiff, the Court construes this action to be abandoned. Accordingly, the Court will dismiss this action by separate Order. Date: cc: September 23, 2008 Plaintiff, pro se Defendants 4412.008 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.