Doherty v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Company

District Court, D. South Carolina

Doherty v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Company

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ROCK HILL DIVISION

Mary Teresa Doherty, ) C/A No.: 0:19-211-TLW-SVH ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) ORDER State Farm Fire and Casualty ) Company and Jay Killen Insurance ) Agency, Inc., ) ) Defendants. ) )

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, brought this action to resolve a claim she made against her homeowner’s insurance. [ECF No. 1-1]. On August 20, 2019, the undersigned granted the motion of State Farm Fire and Casualty Company (“State Farm”) to compel discovery responses from Plaintiff. [ECF No. 29]. The order stated “Plaintiff is advised that failure to comply with the court’s order may result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed for failure to participate in discovery and/or sanctions, including payment of State Farm’s attorneys’ fees and costs in preparing such motions.” . at 3. On September 16, 2019, State Farm filed a motion to dismiss based on Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the court’s order. [ECF No. 31]. As Plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the court entered an order pursuant to ,

528 F.2d 309

(4th Cir. 1975), advising her of the importance of the motion and of the need for her to file an adequate response by October 18, 2019. [ECF No. 34]. Plaintiff was specifically advised that if she failed to respond adequately, the motion may be granted. Notwithstanding the specific warning and instructions set forth in the court’s Roseboro order, Plaintiff has failed to respond to State Farm’s motion. As such, it appears to the court that she does not oppose the motion and wishes to abandon this action. Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff is directed to advise the court whether she wishes to continue with this case and to file a

response to the motion to dismiss by November 5, 2019. Plaintiff is further advised that if she fails to respond, the undersigned will recommend that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute. See Davis v. Williams,

588 F.2d 69, 70

(4th Cir. 1978); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). IT IS SO ORDERED. (Yaoi. V Madper October 22, 2019 Shiva V. Hodges Columbia, South Carolina United States Magistrate Judge

Reference

Status
Unknown