BRICKLAYERS & TROWEL TRADES INTERNATIONAL PENSION FUND v. LANDRY MASONRY COMPANY, INC.

CourtDistrict Court, S.D. Indiana
DecidedJune 6, 2023
Docket1:22-cv-01298
StatusUnknown

This text of BRICKLAYERS & TROWEL TRADES INTERNATIONAL PENSION FUND v. LANDRY MASONRY COMPANY, INC. (BRICKLAYERS & TROWEL TRADES INTERNATIONAL PENSION FUND v. LANDRY MASONRY COMPANY, INC.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Indiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
BRICKLAYERS & TROWEL TRADES INTERNATIONAL PENSION FUND v. LANDRY MASONRY COMPANY, INC., (S.D. Ind. 2023).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

BRICKLAYERS & TROWEL TRADES ) INTERNATIONAL PENSION FUND, ET AL., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) No. 1:22-cv-01298-JMS-TAB vs. ) ) LANDRY MASONRY COMPANY, INC., ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

On December 13, 2022, Plaintiffs filed a Motion for Clerk's Entry of Default against Defendant Landry Masonry Company, Inc. ("Landry") and on January 3, 2023, the Clerk entered default against Landry. [Filing No. 9; Filing No. 10.] Since the January 3, 2023 entry of default, no activity has taken place in this case. Specifically, Plaintiffs have not filed a Motion for Default Judgment. Plaintiffs must SHOW CAUSE no later than June 21, 2023 why the Court should not dismiss this action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-631 (1962) ("The authority of a court to dismiss sua sponte for lack of prosecution has generally been considered an 'inherent power,' governed not by rule or statute but by the control necessarily vested in courts to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases"); see also GCIU Employer Retirement Fund v. Chicago Tribune Co., 8 F.3d 1195, 1198-1199 (7th Cir. 1993) ("[A] party cannot decide for itself when it feels like pressing its action and when it feels like taking a break because trial judges have a responsibility to litigants to keep their court calendars as current as humanly possible") (quotation omitted). Any response to this Order must include a proposed schedule to promptly resolve this action. A failure to respond will be deemed consent to a dismissal without prejudice.

Date: 6/6/2023 Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson, Judge ‘United States District Court Southern District of Indiana

Distribution via ECF only to all counsel of record

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

Related

Link v. Wabash Railroad
370 U.S. 626 (Supreme Court, 1962)
GCIU Employer Retirement Fund v. Chicago Tribune Co.
8 F.3d 1195 (Seventh Circuit, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
BRICKLAYERS & TROWEL TRADES INTERNATIONAL PENSION FUND v. LANDRY MASONRY COMPANY, INC., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bricklayers-trowel-trades-international-pension-fund-v-landry-masonry-insd-2023.