Allen v. Rushing

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• considering fact that 6 plaintiff did not file motion to reinstate when addressing whether plaintiff diligently prosecuted his case
• noting, in affirming dismissal for want of prosecution, that case was on file for thirteen months, record did not indicate that plaintiff had contacted clerk’s office to effectuate service of process, and plaintiff did not file motion to reinstate after dismissal
• “Evidence of attempting to serve the named defendants is one of many factors an appellate court may consider in reviewing a trial court’s order dismissing a case for want of 5 prosecution.”
• alleged delay by clerk’s office was not valid excuse sufficient to constitute due diligence in effecting service of process; if plaintiff could have easily corrected clerk’s failure to issue citation by exercising due diligence, plaintiff bears responsibility for delay

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).