Jackson v. Stephens

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont Division · July 7, 2025 · No. 1:25-cv-00059

Summary

This United States Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation addresses a pro se civil rights lawsuit filed by Kennon J. Jackson against Zena Stephens and others. Because the plaintiff’s mailed correspondence was returned undelivered and he failed to provide an updated address, the court found he did not diligently prosecute the action. Citing Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and relevant Fifth Circuit precedent, the magistrate judge recommends dismissing the case without prejudice for want of prosecution. Parties are notified of their right to file written objections within fourteen days.

Court
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Beaumont Division
Writing for the Court
Zack Hawthorn
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
Decision date
July 7, 2025
Docket number
1:25-cv-00059
Procedural posture
Motion to dismiss for want of prosecution under Rule 41(b)
Precedential value
nonprecedential
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

motions to dismisscivil procedure

Practice areas

civil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the district court may dismiss a civil action sua sponte for want of prosecution under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) when a pro se plaintiff fails to keep the court informed of a current address.

Holdings

  1. The court may dismiss the action without prejudice under Rule 41(b) because the plaintiff failed to diligently prosecute the case by not providing a current address.

Key quotations

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) authorizes the district court to dismiss an action for want of prosecution sua sponte whenever necessary to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.

Factual background

Kennon J. Jackson, pro se, filed a civil rights lawsuit against Zena Stephens and others. The court mailed a preliminary filing fee order to the plaintiff's jail address, which was returned as the plaintiff was no longer there. The plaintiff did not supply a new address or otherwise contact the court.

Procedural history

The plaintiff filed pro se a civil rights action but failed to provide a current address. The magistrate judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636, recommended dismissal for want of prosecution.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…