Scobey v. Dobbs

Docket 1:25-cv-00163

Filed
2025-10-02
Terminated
Not recorded
Case type
cv

Outcome

want of prosecution

FJC civil IDB DISTRICT=65 OFFICE=1 DOCKET=2500163 FILEDATE=10/02/2025 DISP=2, PROCPROG=2, JUDGMENT=0; codebook: https://www.fjc.gov/sites/default/files/idb/codebooks/Civil%20Codebook%201988%20Forward%2010252023.pdf

Outcome source

Parties and representation

      Party and firm records are not available for this case.

      Panel

        No sourced panel votes are recorded.

        Opinions and documents

        UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION BRENT SCOBEY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Case No. 1:25-cv-00163-MTS ) MARK DOBBS, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on pro se Plaintiff Brent Scobey’s Motion for Relief from Judgment. Doc. [11]. The Court previously dismissed this action without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with two Court orders. See Doc. [9]. Because Plaintiff represents that he did not receive copies of the Court’s orders, Doc. [11], the Court will grant his Motion. But the Court admonishes Plaintiff that he has an affirmative duty to monitor the docket in this case. See Fox v. Am. Airlines, Inc., 389 F.3d 1291, 1294 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (joined by Roberts, J.) (citing United States ex rel. McAllan v. City of New York, 248 F.3d 48, 53 (2d Cir. 2001) (per curiam)); Casimir v. Sunrise Fin., Inc., 299 F. App’x 591, 593 (7th Cir. 2008) (citing Soliman v. Johanns, 412 F.3d 920, 922 (8th Cir. 2005)). Thus, even if Plaintiff represents that he does not receive future orders, that alone will be insufficient to excuse his failure to comply. Since the Court will reopen this case, the Court now reviews Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis. Doc. [13]. In his application, Plaintiff notes that he has $1,000 in cash or his bank accounts and has a monthly income of $4,200. Id. And he details only $1,300 in monthly expenses. /d. Based on these figures he provides, the Court will deny his Application and order him to prepay the $405 filing fee in this matter no later than Wednesday, May 06, 2026. See Griffin v. Centurion, LLC, 2:25-cv- 0062-MTS, 2026 WL 696535, at *2 (E.D. Mo. Mar. 12, 2026) (noting district courts have wide discretion in determining whether a plaintiff should be allowed to proceed in forma pauperis). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Relief from Judgment, Doc. [11], is GRANTED. The Order of Dismissal previously entered is VACATED, and this action is REOPENED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Application for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis, Doc. [13], is DENIED. No later than Wednesday, May 06, 2026, Plaintiff shall prepay the $405 filing fee in full. If Plaintiff fails to do so by that date, the Court will dismiss this action without further notice. Dated this 15th day of April 2026. |) □□ ul UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE _2-

        Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.