Bobby L. Spears v. Saint Louis County, et al.

E.D. Missouri

Bobby L. Spears v. Saint Louis County, et al.

DecidedFebruary 2, 2026

Docket4:25-cv-01305

StatusUnknown

This text of Bobby L. Spears v. Saint Louis County, et al. (Bobby L. Spears v. Saint Louis County, et al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bobby L. Spears v. Saint Louis County, et al., (E.D. Mo. 2026).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

BOBBY L. SPEARS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 4:25-cv-01305-CMS ) SAINT LOUIS COUNTY, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court upon review of the file. Plaintiff Bobby L. Spears commenced this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action in August 2025, alleging civil rights violations at the Saint Louis County Justice Center. ECF No. 1. On December 16, 2025, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and directed him to file an amended complaint within thirty (30) days. ECF No. 6. The Court cautioned Plaintiff that his failure to timely comply with the Order would result in the dismissal of the case without further notice. Plaintiff’s response was due by January 15, 2026. To date, Plaintiff has neither responded to the Court’s Order, nor sought additional time to do so. Plaintiff was given meaningful notice of what was expected, he was cautioned that his case would be dismissed if he failed to timely comply, and he was given ample time to comply. The Court will therefore dismiss this action, without prejudice, due to Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s December 16, 2025, Order and his failure to prosecute his case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); see also Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962) (the authority of a court to dismiss sua sponte for lack of prosecution is inherent power governed “by the control necessarily vested in courts to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases”); Brown v. Frey, 806 F.2d 801, 803 (8th Cir. 1986) (a district court has the power to dismiss an action for the plaintiff's failure to comply with any court order). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice. A separate order of dismissal will be entered herewith. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that an appeal from this dismissal would not be taken in good faith. Dated this 2nd day of February 2026. / | / f j

L/S \ v' £ Vv CRISTIAN M. STEVENS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

BOBBY L. SPEARS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 4:25-cv-01305-CMS ) SAINT LOUIS COUNTY, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court upon review of the file. Plaintiff Bobby L. Spears commenced this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action in August 2025, alleging civil rights violations at the Saint Louis County Justice Center. ECF No. 1. On December 16, 2025, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and directed him to file an amended complaint within thirty (30) days. ECF No. 6. The Court cautioned Plaintiff that his failure to timely comply with the Order would result in the dismissal of the case without further notice. Plaintiff’s response was due by January 15, 2026. To date, Plaintiff has neither responded to the Court’s Order, nor sought additional time to do so. Plaintiff was given meaningful notice of what was expected, he was cautioned that his case would be dismissed if he failed to timely comply, and he was given ample time to comply. The Court will therefore dismiss this action, without prejudice, due to Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s December 16, 2025, Order and his failure to prosecute his case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); see also Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962) (the authority of a court to dismiss sua sponte for lack of prosecution is inherent power governed “by the control necessarily vested in courts to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases”); Brown v. Frey, 806 F.2d 801, 803 (8th Cir. 1986) (a district court has the power to dismiss an action for the plaintiff's failure to comply with any court order). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice. A separate order of dismissal will be entered herewith. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that an appeal from this dismissal would not be taken in good faith. Dated this 2nd day of February 2026. / | / f j

L/S \ v' £ Vv CRISTIAN M. STEVENS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Bobby L. Spears v. Saint Louis County, et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bobby-l-spears-v-saint-louis-county-et-al-moed-2026.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack