Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Sanders v. Newark New Jersey Police Department 4th District

United States District Court, D. New Jersey

October 5, 2017

MICHEAL SANDERS, Plaintiff,
v.
NEWARK, NEW JERSEY POLICE DEPARTMENT, FOURTH DISTRICT, et al., Defendant.

          MICHEAL SANDERS PLAINTIFF, PRO SE

          WILSON DAVID ANTOINE COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT

          OPINION

          JOHN MICHAEL VAZQUEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Plaintiff was incarcerated in Bayside State Prison when he filed this civil rights action on October 5, 2015. (ECF No. 1.) The Court terminated the action for failure to pay the filing fee or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (ECF Nos. 2, 3.) After Plaintiff submitted a properly completed IFP application, the Complaint was filed and served. (ECF Nos. 7-14.) Defendants answered the Complaint, and discovery commenced. (ECF Nos. 17, 22, 23.) On January 27, 2017, counsel for Defendants Detective Jeffrey Bouie, Sergeant Dwayne Marshall, and Captain Jose Gonzalez (“the Police Defendants”) informed the Court that Plaintiff had contacted him concerning discovery. (ECF No. 22.) Plaintiff was in a halfway house and expected to be released on March 7, 2017. (Id.)

         On March 6, 2017, the Police Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 24.) Plaintiff's response to the motion was due on March 20, 2017, but he failed to respond. On March 15, 2017, mail that the Court sent to Plaintiff at Bayside State Prison was returned stamped “REFUSED. UNABLE TO FORWARD.” (ECF No. 25.)

         Plaintiff has not provided the Court with his new address.

         I. DISCUSSION

         Local Civil Rule 10.1(a) provides, in relevant part:

unrepresented parties must advise the Court of any change in their . . . address within seven days . . . of such change by filing a notice of said change with the Clerk. Failure to file a notice of change may result in the imposition of sanctions by the Court.

         Dismissing a Plaintiff's complaint without prejudice is an appropriate remedy for noncompliance with this rule. See Archie v. Dept. of Corr., Civ. No. 12-2466 (RBK/JS), 2015 WL 333299, at *1 (D.N.J. Jan. 23, 2015) (collecting cases).

         Mail sent to Plaintiff's last known address was returned. To date, Plaintiff has not informed the Court of his new address. When dismissing an action as a sanction, a court should weigh the following factors:

(1) the extent of the party's personal responsibility; (2) the prejudice to the adversary caused by the failure to meet scheduling orders and respond to discovery; (3) a history of dilatoriness; (4) whether the conduct of the party or the attorney was willful or in bad faith; (5) the effectiveness of sanctions other than dismissal, which entails an analysis of alternative sanctions; and (6) the meritoriousness of the claim or defense.

Poulis v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., 747 F.2d 863, 868 (3rd Cir. 1984).

         A. Extent of the Party's ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.