Brandon Thrasher v. Amarillo Police Dept
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 3826
| 5th Cir. | 2013Background
- Thrasher, acting pro se, filed a §1983 suit on February 8, 2010 against Officer Castillo, the City of Amarillo, and others for alleged wrongful arrest.
- The district court ordered show cause after 120 days to plead service; Thrasher extended to July 1, 2010 but failed to perfect service.
- Thrasher served personally but without a copy of the complaint and did not comply with Rule 4(c).
- Defendants moved to dismiss for insufficient service; Thrasher’s late attempts and post-extension in October–December 2010 did not perfect service.
- The district court dismissed January 26, 2011 for failure to show good cause for delay in service; this appeal follows.
- The court affirms, holding no abuse of discretion in applying Rule 4(m) and finding no good cause for delay.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether dismissal under Rule 4(m) was proper | Thrasher contends the district court misapplied Rule 4(m) and erred in timing. | Castillo/City argue failure to timely serve warrants dismissal for lack of service. | Dismissal affirmed; district court did not abuse its discretion. |
| Whether Thrasher showed good cause for delay in service | Thrasher argues pro se status and illness show good cause. | Defendants contend no adequate showing of due diligence or good faith. | No good cause; delay not excused. |
| Whether dismissal should be with prejudice given possible statute-of-limitations issues | Thrasher seeks relief to allow re-service efforts before a possible bar. | Defendants urge dismissal under Rule 4(m) with prejudice in light of delay. | Rule 4(m) dismissal upheld; heightened prejudice considerations insufficient to override. |
Key Cases Cited
- Millan v. USAA Gen. Indem. Co., 546 F.3d 321 (5th Cir. 2008) (heightened standard for dismissal with prejudice; excusable neglect thresholds apply)
- Sys. Signs Supplies v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Wash., D.C., 903 F.2d 1011 (5th Cir. 1990) (burden on plaintiff to show good cause; requires more than inadvertence)
- Winters v. Teledyne Movible Offshore, Inc., 776 F.2d 1304 (5th Cir. 1985) (good cause standard; inadvertence not sufficient)
- Newby v. Enron Corp., 284 F. App’x 146 (5th Cir. 2008) (confusion over bankruptcy stay not good cause)
- Price v. McGlathery, 792 F.2d 472 (5th Cir. 1986) (aggravating factors for dismissal with prejudice)