Rickard v. Hopkins County Jail, No. 4:2012cv00013 - Document 6 (W.D. Ky. 2012)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM AND OPINION by Chief Judge Joseph H. McKinley, Jr on 4/27/12; The Court will dismiss this action by separate order. cc:counsel, Plaintiff (pro se), HCA (JBM)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT OWENSBORO TERRY RICKARD PLAINTIFF v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:12CV-P13-M HOPKINS COUNTY JAIL DEFENDANT MEMORANDUM OPINION Upon filing the instant action, Plaintiff assumed the responsibility to keep this Court advised of his current address and to actively litigate his claims. 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. ). On January 20, 2012, the Clerk of Court issued a deficiency notice to Plaintiff directing him to complete a complaint form, to either pay the filing fee or file an application to proceed without prepayment of fees, and to submit a completed summons form for each Defendant. The deficiency notice advised Plaintiff that failure to comply within 30 days, without good cause shown, would result in the matter being brought to the attention of the Court. Because Plaintiff failed to comply, the Court entered an Order on March 12, 2012, directing Plaintiff to show cause for his failure to comply or, in the alternative, to comply. On March 19, 2012, the U.S. Postal Service returned the Order to the Court. The envelope was marked Return to Sender, Not Deliverable as Addressed, Unable to Forward. Apparently, Plaintiff is no longer incarcerated at the Hopkins County Jail, and because he 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 action by separate Order. Date: April 27, 2012 cc: Plaintiff, pro se Hopkins County Attorney 4414.005 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.