EDDIE JAMES MOULTRIE
v.
CAPTAIN CARR, LIEUTENANT PERKINS, OFFICER LUFURINGO

N.D. Fla. | 2025-10-20
No. 3:24-cv-586
2025 FFL 27321 District Court, N.D. Florida (2025)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The court dismissed Moultrie's civil rights action against prison officials for failure to accurately disclose his litigation history as required by local rules and the standard complaint form. The dismissal was without prejudice, allowing Moultrie to refile if he complies with disclosure requirements.


Holding

Dismissal without prejudice is an appropriate exercise of the district court's inherent authority to manage its docket and enforce local rules when a plaintiff violates those rules by failing to disclose his full litigation history.


Key Quotes

“Dismissal without prejudice was an appropriate exercise of the district court's inherent authority to manage its docket and enforce the local rules.”

Establishes that dismissal is a proper sanction for violating procedural disclosure rules

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Moultrie filed a civil action against prison officials (Captain Carr, Lieutenant Perkins, and Officer Lufuringo). A magistrate judge issued a report a…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court

The magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation that concluded the court should dismiss based on Plaintiff's failure to accurately disclose his litigation history. ECF No. 47. Plaintiff has not filed any objection to the report and recommendation, and his deadline to do so has passed.

Having carefully considered the matter, I agree with the magistrate judge, and I conclude dismissal is appropriate. See McNair v. Johnson, 143 F. 4th 1301, 1308 (11th Cir. 2025) (“Dismissal without prejudice was an appropriate exercise of the district court's inherent authority to manage its docket and enforce the local rules. [Plaintiff] violated the local rules by failing to disclose his full litigation history, as required by the duly adopted standard complaint form."). I now adopt the report and recommendation and incorporate it into this order.

The motion to dismiss (ECF No. 42) is GRANTED. The clerk will enter a judgment that says, "This case is dismissed without prejudice for failure to accurately disclose litigation history.” The clerk will then close the file.

SO ORDERED on October 20, 2025.

s/ Allen Winsor Chief United States District Judge


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw