Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California ordered plaintiff Layla Suggett to show cause why her action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with local rules. The order gives plaintiff twenty-one days to explain the failure to respond to defendants’ motion to dismiss and to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition.
Holdings
- A district court may impose sanctions, including dismissal, for failure to comply with its orders or local rules, although involuntary dismissal is a harsh penalty.
Questions Presented
- Whether plaintiff should be required to show cause why the action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with local rules after failing to respond to defendants' motion to dismiss.
- Whether the court may impose dismissal as a sanction for failure to comply with court orders or local rules.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (3)
- Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005)(followed)
- Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988)(followed)
- Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642 (9th Cir. 2002)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…