BRADLEY
v.
WILLIAMS
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.
The court recommended dismissal of the pro se plaintiff's complaint because he failed to provide an accurate mailing address, preventing communication necessary for adjudication.
Plaintiff filed a pro se civil rights complaint and provided an address that turned out to be an attorney's office, not his own. The court attempted t…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Pro Se Litigant Obligations cases and more on FLexlaw
Despite being told that he must provide the Court with his current address, Plaintiff has not done so. Instead, he provided an address that apparently has no connection to him. As a result, the Court has no address at which it can contact Plaintiff. That makes it impossible for the Court to communicate with Plaintiff as necessary to adjudicate his case. A perfect example of this is the inability of the Court to send the order to Plaintiff directing him to file an in forma pauperis application or pay the filing fee in this case. Thus, dismissal is warranted. See Gilbert v. Daniels, 725 F. App’x 789, 792 (11th Cir. 2018) (affirming the district court’s dismissal when the plaintiff failed to update the court of his address change, which prevented him from complying with court orders); see also Washington v. Escambia Cnty. Jail, No. 3:22cv4842, 2022 WL
4486079, at *1 (N.D. Fla. June 6, 2022), adopted by 2022 WL 4486984 (Sept. 27, 2022) (dismissing complaint where the pro se plaintiff failed to provide an accurate mailing address). For the reasons above, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that
Plaintiff’s complaint be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to provide the Court with an accurate mailing address. The Clerk of Court should be directed to close this case.
At Pensacola, Florida this 11th day of December 2023. /s/ Zachary C. Bolitho Zachary C. Bolitho United States Magistrate Judge
Notice to the Parties
Objections must be filed within fourteen days of the date of the Report and Recommendation. Any different deadline that may appear on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only and does not control. An objecting party must serve a copy of the objections on all other parties. A party who fails to object to the magistrate judge’s findings or recommendations contained in a report and recommendation waives the right to challenge on appeal the district court’s order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636.