§Why CasetextPricing

Reinbold v. US Postal Service, et al

MEMORANDUM in Support re MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution or in the Alternative to Compel Discovery, 16 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution or in the Alternative to Compel Discovery

11 Cited authorities

  1. Poulis v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co.

    747 F.2d 863 (3d Cir. 1984)   Cited 3,429 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that imposing excess costs, including attorneys' fees, caused by unjustified attorney conduct or delay during the pretrial process on the attorney responsible is the "preferable sanction"

  2. Emerson v. Thiel Coll.

    296 F.3d 184 (3d Cir. 2002)   Cited 1,217 times
    Holding that "[b]ecause the individual defendants do not receive federal aid, [plaintiff] does not state a claim against them under the Rehabilitation Act"

  3. Obeng v. Delaware State Police

    Civil Action No. 04-1248 (GMS) (D. Del. Jul. 7, 2005)   Cited 1 times

    Civil Action No. 04-1248 (GMS). July 7, 2005 MEMORANDUM GREGORY SLEET, District Judge I. INTRODUCTION On September 9, 2004, Richard Y. Obeng ("Obeng") filed a pro se action against the Delaware State Police (the "DSP"), Comcast Cable ("Comcast"), and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (the "FBI") (collectively, the "defendants"). In his complaint, Obeng alleges that the defendants have, since 1999, "engaged in an elaborate and unlawful series of engagements to encroach on the plaintiff's privacy

  4. Workman v. Biles

    Civil Action No. 00-1030 JJF (D. Del. Mar. 18, 2004)

    Civil Action No. 00-1030 JJF March 18, 2004 Timothy L. Workman, Seaford, Delaware, for Pro Se Plaintiff Stuart B. Drowos, Esquire of the Department of Justice, State of Delaware, Wilmington, Delaware, for Defendants MEMORANDUM OPINION JOSEPH FARNAN, District Judge Pending before the Court is a Motion To Dismiss For Failure To Prosecute Pursuant To Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b) (D.I. 20) filed by Defendants Sgt. Barry Biles, and Sgt. Gary Campbell (collectively "Defendants"). For the reasons discussed, the Court

  5. Guy v. City of Wilmington

    169 F.R.D. 593 (D. Del. 1996)   Cited 3 times
    Holding that alternative sanctions would be ineffective to cure plaintiff's delinquency where plaintiff was attorney who was prosecuting his own case in dilatory manner

  6. Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 8   Cited 160,289 times   196 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

  7. Rule 41 - Dismissal of Actions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 41   Cited 112,111 times   198 Legal Analyses
    Holding that such dismissal "operates as an adjudication on the merits"

  8. Rule 26 - Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 26   Cited 97,825 times   674 Legal Analyses
    Adopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37

  9. Rule 37 - Failure to Make Disclosures or to Cooperate in Discovery; Sanctions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 37   Cited 47,073 times   326 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a party may be barred from using a witness if it fails to disclose the witness

  10. Rule 34 - Producing Documents, Electronically Stored Information, and Tangible Things, or Entering onto Land, for Inspection and Other Purposes

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 34   Cited 13,452 times   152 Legal Analyses
    Finding that the rules related to electronic discovery were "not meant to create a routine right of direct access to a party's electronic information system, although such access may be justified in some circumstances."

  11. Rule 33 - Interrogatories to Parties

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 33   Cited 11,139 times   22 Legal Analyses
    Adopting Rule 30(b)