Zorrer v. Spartanburg County Detention Center
1:16-cv-03085
| D.S.C. | Aug 8, 2017Background
- Plaintiff Thomas R. Zorrer, proceeding pro se, filed suit on September 9, 2016 against numerous Spartanburg County detention center staff and officials.
- Defendants moved for summary judgment on May 5, 2017.
- Court issued a Roseboro notice explaining the importance of responding and set a response deadline; deadline was later extended to July 10, 2017.
- Zorrer failed to file any substantive response to the summary judgment motion.
- Court further ordered Zorrer to advise by August 3, 2017 whether he wished to proceed; he did not respond.
- Magistrate Judge Shiva V. Hodges recommended dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the case should proceed on the merits | Zorrer offered no responsive filings or opposition to the motion for summary judgment | Defendants sought summary judgment and argued dismissal appropriate given lack of opposition | Case not adjudicated on merits; recommended dismissal for failure to prosecute |
| Whether failure to respond warrants dismissal under Rule 41(b) | No argument presented (no response filed) | Dismissal with prejudice is proper for want of prosecution after warnings and extensions | Court recommended dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute |
| Whether pro se status required additional procedural protections | Zorrer relied on pro se status but did not respond to Roseboro notice | Defendants relied on the court’s Roseboro notice and extensions to satisfy due process | Court found Roseboro notice and extensions sufficient; dismissal appropriate due to noncompliance |
| Whether plaintiff abandoned the action | No communication from Zorrer indicating intent to continue | Defendants argued plaintiff’s silence indicated abandonment | Court concluded plaintiff appeared to have abandoned the action and recommended dismissal |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. Williams, 588 F.2d 69 (4th Cir.) (failure to prosecute supports dismissal)
- Roseboro v. Garrison, 528 F.2d 309 (4th Cir.) (notice to pro se litigants about summary judgment consequences)
- Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310 (4th Cir.) (district court need not conduct de novo review absent timely objections to R&R)
- Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (U.S.) (failure to timely object to R&R waives appellate review)
- Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir.) (procedural standards related to objections and review)
- United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir.) (procedural waiver for failure to timely object)