Sayles v. State of Nevada
2:18-cv-01007
D. Nev.Sep 12, 2019Background
- Pro se § 1983 complaint filed by former Nevada state prisoner Daryl E. Sayles.
- Court denied the prisoner in forma pauperis (IFP) application as moot on Aug 5, 2019 and ordered Sayles to either file a completed non-prisoner IFP form or pay the $400 filing fee within 30 days.
- Sayles did not file the non-prisoner IFP, pay the fee, or otherwise respond before the deadline.
- The court considered its inherent docket-control authority and Ninth Circuit precedent permitting dismissal for failure to prosecute or to obey court orders.
- Applying the Ninth Circuit’s five-factor test, the court found the public interest in expedition, docket management, and prejudice to defendants favored dismissal; the court had earlier warned that noncompliance would result in dismissal.
- The court dismissed the action with prejudice, vacated the scheduled mediation, and ordered the clerk to close the case.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether dismissal is appropriate for failure to comply with the court's order to file non-prisoner IFP or pay the filing fee | Sayles did not respond or present an argument | Dismissal is appropriate due to noncompliance and delay | Court dismissed the action for failure to comply and prosecute |
| Whether dismissal should be with prejudice | No response from Sayles | Prior warning and prejudice justify dismissal with prejudice | Court dismissed the case with prejudice and closed the docket |
Key Cases Cited
- Thompson v. Hous. Auth. of City of Los Angeles, 782 F.2d 829 (9th Cir. 1986) (courts’ inherent docket-control and dismissal authority)
- Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421 (9th Cir. 1986) (dismissal for lack of prosecution and noncompliance)
- Malone v. U.S. Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128 (9th Cir. 1987) (dismissal for failure to comply with court order)
- Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258 (9th Cir. 1992) (dismissal for failure to follow court orders; warnings satisfy consideration of alternatives)
- Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52 (9th Cir. 1995) (affirming dismissal for noncompliance with local rules)
- Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439 (9th Cir. 1988) (procedural noncompliance supports dismissal)
- Anderson v. Air West, 542 F.2d 522 (9th Cir. 1976) (presumption of prejudice from unreasonable delay)