O'ROuRke Bros. Inc., an Iowa Corporation, and Jeff O'ROuRke v. Nesbitt Burns, Inc., a Canadian Corporation, Andreas F. Kiedrowski, and John C. Dunn

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that dismissal under Rule 41(b) is “a drastic remedy, which should never be lightly imposed”
• holding “a court has inherent authority to dismiss a case sua sponte for a failure to prosecute” and may do so under Rule 41(b)
• expressing disagreement with Ninth Circuit view that un- der Rule 4(m), “there is apparently no time limit for [for- eign] service”
• “In certain circumstances, a plaintiff’s dereliction in not obtaining service may lead beyond Rule 4 and head off into territory covered by Rule 41(b).”
• “[I]t is clear that a court has inherent authority to dismiss a case sua sponte for a failure to prosecute.”
• “[I]t is clear that a court has inherent authority to dismiss a case sua sponte for a failure to prosecute.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).