Skip to main content
Fifth Circuit· 7/26/1996

Thompson v. Brown

Citations

  • 91 F.3d 20
  • 1996 WL 420202

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining that second sentence of Rule 4(m) “qualifies the district court’s choices, making an extension of time mandatory when the plaintiff shows good cause.”
  • noting that “the plain language of rule 4(m) broadens a district court’s discretion by allowing it to extend the time for service even when a plaintiff fails to show good cause.”
  • denying the plaintiffs appeal because he did not present his argument for a discretionary time extension to the district court
  • discussing Rule 4(m) under an older version of Rule 4 which allowed dismissal after 120 days
  • “If good cause does not exist, the court may, in its discretion, decide whether to dismiss the case without prejudice or extend time for service.”
  • “If good cause does not exist, the court may, in its discretion, decide whether to dismiss the case without prejudice or extend time for service.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Garwood, Smith, Benavides

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

37 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Thompson v. Brown

24 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.