It depends upon the jurisdiction in which the case is pending, and the type of case involved. Frequently, in a civil suit that is pending in a court of general jurisdiction, there must be a period of inactivity for a year; however, the precise time is governed by the rules of procedure for that court. Additionally, the time may differ if the case is pending in a "specialty" court, such as Small Claims. Different rules of procedure often apply, including a shortened period of inactivity before the case is subject to dismissal for lack of prosecution.
No. If the dismissal was denied that means the case will proceed to trial.
Threatening to sue has no legal weight whatsoever. On the other hand, if the plaintiff in a lawsuit dies, the matter may proceed with the plaintiff's heirs, etc.
There's undoubtedly necessary information missing from this question - however - have your attorney file a motion for dismissal.
When a victim does not show up to court and the state dismisses the case, it is often referred to as a "case dismissal" or "dismissal for non-appearance." This can occur when the prosecution lacks sufficient evidence or the victim's testimony is crucial for the case to proceed. In some jurisdictions, this may also be termed a "nolle prosequi," indicating that the prosecution is unwilling to pursue the case further.
You refer to yourself as "the Plaintiff." That would indicate that the case is a civil case and NOT a criminal case. If you are truly the plaintiff in a CIVIL case what you can do is withdraw your complaint. The risky part of this is that if you have caused significant expenditure of time, effort, and money on the part of the defendant, YOU could be sued yourself for the recovery of those expenses, and/or run the risk of being charged with malicious prosecution. If you are represented by an attorney, confer with them, that's what you're paying them for.
A dismissal for want of persecution occurs in a divorce case when a plaintiff does not show up for a scheduled hearing. The motion is dismissed rather than assuming the plaintiff wanted to finalize the divorce.
If a case is dismissed by the court twice, it typically indicates that the court found insufficient grounds to proceed with the case. The plaintiff may have the option to appeal the dismissal or file a motion for reconsideration, depending on the circumstances and legal grounds for the dismissal. However, repeated dismissals can significantly weaken the case's viability, potentially leading to a final judgment that bars the plaintiff from bringing the same claim again. It's essential for the parties involved to consult legal counsel to assess their options and determine the best course of action.
A nominal plaintiff is a party in a legal case who is named in the lawsuit but does not have a significant interest in the outcome of the case. Typically, this role is filled to meet legal requirements or to facilitate the legal process, often representing a larger group or interest. The nominal plaintiff may not actively participate in the proceedings or may do so only as a formality. Their involvement is primarily to allow the case to proceed, often while the real interests are represented by another party.
Yes, a defendant can file a request for dismissal of a lis pendens. This legal action is typically initiated through a motion to expunge or dismiss the lis pendens, arguing that the notice is improperly filed or that the underlying lawsuit lacks merit. If the court finds the lis pendens unjustified, it may grant the request and remove the notice, allowing the defendant to proceed without the encumbrance on their property.
In the court system, "LOE dismissed" typically refers to a "Level of Evidence" dismissal, indicating that a case or charge has been dismissed due to insufficient evidence to support the claims made. This may occur before a trial, often as a result of a motion filed by the defense. A dismissal can also happen if the prosecution chooses not to pursue the case further. Ultimately, this ruling means that the case will not proceed in court.
This would be an unusual circumstance, the prosecution usually will not proceed with a reluctant complainant, however, yes, the case could still go ahead. If the state still wishes to proceed with the prosecution they could call the 'victim' to aid in the case.
"Failure to prosecute" basically means that a plaintiff has failed proceed to trial with "due diligence." Rule 41(b) "allows dismissal for the plaintiff's failure to prosecute, [and] is intended as a safeguard against delay in litigation." 9 Wright & Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure: Civil 3d § 2370. Dismissals under 41(b) operate as an "adjudication on the merits," thus precluding further claims on the same facts and law. Furthermore, the court can issue a dismissal for failure to prosecute sua sponte. Link v. Wabach Railroad, 370 U.S. 626. Also, the court can choose to levy fines as a less harsh alternative to dismissal. Cleminshaw Co. v. City of Norwhich, 93 F.R.D. 338.