Smith v. Franklin County Sheriff's Department

S.D. Illinois

Smith v. Franklin County Sheriff's Department

DecidedJuly 10, 2025

Docket3:22-cv-01655

StatusUnknown

This text of Smith v. Franklin County Sheriff's Department (Smith v. Franklin County Sheriff's Department) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Smith v. Franklin County Sheriff's Department, (S.D. Ill. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

) WILLIAM L. SMITH, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case No. 22-cv-1655-RJD v. ) ) PAUL URASKI, ) ) Defendant. ) ) )

ORDER DALY, Magistrate Judge: Plaintiff filed this lawsuit pro se and pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983, alleging that Defendant used excessive force upon him during an arrest. Doc. 35. The parties conducted discovery and the Court held a telephone status conference on May 27, 2025 in order to select a trial date. Doc. 67. Court records reflect that the Order setting the May 27, 2025 status conference was mailed to Plaintiff on May 12, 2025. Plaintiff did not appear for the May 27, 2025 status conference. Doc. 68. The Court set this case for a final pretrial conference on July 24, 2025 and jury trial on August 5, 2025 and also entered an order with multiple pretrial deadlines, including pretrial disclosures and motions in limine. Docs. 68 and 70. Moreover, the undersigned entered a Show Cause Order, warning Plaintiff that his failure to file a pleading with the Court that explained his failure to appear for the May 27, 2025 status conference would result in this case being dismissed with prejudice. Doc. 69. Plaintiff’s response to the Show Cause Order was due on June 17, 2025. Id. Page 1 of 2 More than three weeks have now passed since Plaintiff’s response to the Show Cause Order was due. Plaintiff has not filed a response to the show cause order, nor any type of pleading that acknowledges the deadline for motions in limine (July 3, 2025) and pretrial disclosures (July 7, 2025). It appears that Plaintiff lost interest in this case. This Court has the “inherent authority to dismiss a case sua sponte for a plaintiff’s failure

to prosecute.” O’Rourke Bros. Inc. v. Nesbitt Burns, Inc., 201 F.3d 948, 952 (7th Cir. 2000). Dismissal is appropriate here because Plaintiff failed to appear for the status conference and failed to comply with the Show Cause Order. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: July 10, 2025

s/ Reona J. Daly Hon. Reona J. Daly United States Magistrate Judge

Page 2 of 2

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

) WILLIAM L. SMITH, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) Case No. 22-cv-1655-RJD v. ) ) PAUL URASKI, ) ) Defendant. ) ) )

ORDER DALY, Magistrate Judge: Plaintiff filed this lawsuit pro se and pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983, alleging that Defendant used excessive force upon him during an arrest. Doc. 35. The parties conducted discovery and the Court held a telephone status conference on May 27, 2025 in order to select a trial date. Doc. 67. Court records reflect that the Order setting the May 27, 2025 status conference was mailed to Plaintiff on May 12, 2025. Plaintiff did not appear for the May 27, 2025 status conference. Doc. 68. The Court set this case for a final pretrial conference on July 24, 2025 and jury trial on August 5, 2025 and also entered an order with multiple pretrial deadlines, including pretrial disclosures and motions in limine. Docs. 68 and 70. Moreover, the undersigned entered a Show Cause Order, warning Plaintiff that his failure to file a pleading with the Court that explained his failure to appear for the May 27, 2025 status conference would result in this case being dismissed with prejudice. Doc. 69. Plaintiff’s response to the Show Cause Order was due on June 17, 2025. Id. Page 1 of 2 More than three weeks have now passed since Plaintiff’s response to the Show Cause Order was due. Plaintiff has not filed a response to the show cause order, nor any type of pleading that acknowledges the deadline for motions in limine (July 3, 2025) and pretrial disclosures (July 7, 2025). It appears that Plaintiff lost interest in this case. This Court has the “inherent authority to dismiss a case sua sponte for a plaintiff’s failure

to prosecute.” O’Rourke Bros. Inc. v. Nesbitt Burns, Inc., 201 F.3d 948, 952 (7th Cir. 2000). Dismissal is appropriate here because Plaintiff failed to appear for the status conference and failed to comply with the Show Cause Order. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: July 10, 2025

s/ Reona J. Daly Hon. Reona J. Daly United States Magistrate Judge

Page 2 of 2

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Smith v. Franklin County Sheriff's Department, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-franklin-county-sheriffs-department-ilsd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack