- 12 -
communication from his former attorney, respondent, and this
Court. The resolution of this case had been delayed because
petitioner failed to cooperate with respondent in preparing the
case for trial and appeared at the initial calendar call
unprepared for trial. Petitioner’s actions in this proceeding
have prejudiced respondent in that respondent has been required
to devote hours of time trying to prepare this case for trial.
Although petitioner initially and currently appears before
this Court in a pro se capacity, we see no reason to afford him
any special protection as a pro se petitioner. The Court of
Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has noted that while “trial courts
are encouraged to liberally treat procedural errors made by pro
se litigants, especially when a technical or arcane procedural
rule is involved, such tolerance does not extend to a litigant’s
failure to appear in court without explanation or without
contacting the court beforehand.” Id. The Rules and orders of
this Court that petitioner repeatedly violated were not technical
or arcane. Furthermore, petitioner was put on notice that his
failure to appear may result in dismissal of his case.
Petitioner’s conduct leaves no alternative other than
dismissal for failure to properly prosecute. No lesser sanction
exists that would remedy petitioner’s failure to appear or
prosecute his case. Pursuant to the foregoing, all matters for
which petitioner bears the burden of proof are dismissed for
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011