Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington dismissed Andrew Greenwood’s action without prejudice under Local Civil Rule 41(b)(2). The dismissal followed the return of mail as undeliverable and the plaintiff’s failure to provide a current address or comply with an order to amend or voluntarily dismiss his complaint. The court also certified that any appeal would not be taken in good faith.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the action should be dismissed without prejudice under Eastern District of Washington Local Civil Rule 41(b)(2) because the pro se plaintiff failed to maintain a current mailing address and failed to prosecute or comply with court orders.
- Whether the court should certify under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal could not be taken in good faith.
Holdings
- A pro se litigant who fails to keep the court informed of a current mailing address after court mail is returned undeliverable may have the action dismissed, and dismissal was warranted here because Plaintiff did not provide a current address or take further action.
- Any appeal from the dismissal order could not be taken in good faith and would lack an arguable basis in law or fact.
Key quotations
“This action is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to LCivR 41(b)(2).” (at 2)
“The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal of this Order could not be taken in good faith and would lack any arguable basis in law or fact.” (at 2)
Factual background
Andrew Greenwood initiated the action while incarcerated at Walla Walla County Corrections and later filed a first amended complaint. The court twice directed him to amend or voluntarily dismiss his pleading. Mail sent to him at the correctional facility was returned as undeliverable, and he neither supplied a current address nor filed anything further.
Procedural history
Plaintiff initiated the action while incarcerated and was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. After the court directed him to amend or voluntarily dismiss his complaint, it dismissed the action when he failed to comply. Upon reconsideration, the court reopened the case and allowed additional time to amend or voluntarily dismiss. Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint, but again failed to comply with a subsequent order; after mail was returned as undeliverable and he filed nothing further, the court dismissed the action without prejudice under LCivR 41(b)(2).