JASMINE KOGER
v.
EVERGLADES HOUSING GROUP, INC. ET AL.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The District Court accepted a Magistrate Judge's recommendation and dismissed Koger's federal civil rights action without prejudice for failure to prosecute and comply with court orders, specifically her failure to pay the required filing fee despite two separate extensions and explicit warnings of dismissal.
The district court properly dismissed the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute and comply with court orders. The court determined that because Koger had been given two separate opportunities to comply with the mandatory filing fee requirement and still failed to do so, dismissal was appropriate pursuant to the court's inherent power to manage its docket.
[1] A pro se plaintiff's failure to pay a required filing fee after being granted extensions and warned of dismissal can result in the dismissal of the action without prejudi…
[2] A court may dismiss an action without prejudice for failure to prosecute and comply with court orders.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“any failure to comply could result in dismissal of the action without further notice”
The explicit warning given in the October 3, 2025 order regarding consequences of failing to pay the filing fee
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKoger filed a pro se complaint on September 2, 2025, asserting that defendants violated federal laws in terminating her residential lease. She also fi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Failure To Comply With Court Orders cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Magistrate Judge Shaniek M. Maynard's Report and Recommendation (the “Report”). The Report recommends dismissal of this action without prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to prosecute [ECF No. 12]. Upon review, the Court ACCEPTS the Report [ECF No. 12] and DISMISSES this action without prejudice for failure to prosecute and comply with Court orders.
***
On September 2, 2025, Plaintiff filed a pro se Complaint asserting that Defendants had violated several federal laws in terminating Plaintiffs residential lease [ECF No. 1]. Plaintiff also filed an accompanying Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”) [ECF No. 3]. On October 3, 2025, Magistrate Judge Maynard issued an Order finding Plaintiff financially ineligible to proceed IFP and requiring her to pay the Court's filing fee by October 17, 2025 [ECF No. 8]. That Order expressly cautioned Plaintiff that any failure to comply could result in dismissal of the action without further notice [ECF No. 8 p. 3 (emphasis in original)]. That deadline passed with no timely payment or other activity by Plaintiff.
CASE NO. 25-14317-CIV-CANNON/Maynard
Then, on November 18, 2025, Judge Maynard issued a second Order sua sponte granting Plaintiff a limited extension of the deadline to pay the filing fee [ECF No. 9]. That Order required Plaintiff to comply by December 1, 2025 [ECF No. 9 p. 1]. Judge Maynard again cautioned Plaintiff that failure to comply could result in dismissal without further notice for failure to prosecute and comply with Court orders [ECF No. 9 p. 1 (emphasis in original)]. Again, this deadline passed with no timely payment or other indication by Plaintiff of an intent to comply. As of now, Plaintiff has neither timely paid the Court's filing fee nor taken any further action to pursue her claims.
Because Plaintiff has been given two separate opportunities to comply with the mandatory filing fee requirement and still has failed to comply [ECF Nos. 8–9], and pursuant to the Court's inherent power to manage its docket, Betty K. Agencies, Ltd. v. M/V Monada, 432 F. 3d 1333, 1337 (11th Cir. 2005), it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. The Magistrate Judge's Report is ACCEPTED [ECF No. 12] as clarified herein. 2. This action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for lack of prosecution and compliance with Court orders. 3. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case.
ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Pierce, Florida, this 20th day of January 2026.
AILEEN M. CANNON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
cc: counsel of record
Jasmine Koger [email protected] PRO SE