2008 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 9-30-2008 

# C ate rb one v

. L anc a s te r C ty P ri son P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 07-4474

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2008 D e c i sion s b y an authori z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " C at e r bone v . L ancas t e r C ty P ri s on" (2008). 2008 D e cisio n s . P ape r 463. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2008/463NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

________________ N o. 07- 4474

________________ STAN LEY J . CA TERBO NE, A ppel l ant

v. LAN CA STER COU NTY PRI SON ; M AN HEI M TOW NSH I P P OLI CE D EPARTM ENT; STON E HA RBO R POLI CE D EPARTM ENT; AV ALO N PO LI CE D EPARTM ENT; CO M M ONWE AL T H NAT I ONAL BA NK, i . e . M e l l o n Ba n k ; S OUT H R E GI ONAL P OL I CE DE P T . ; L ANC AS T E R C OUNT Y S HE RI F F S DE P T . ; F UL T ON B ANK

____________________________________ O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e E a ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C . C i vi l A ct i on N o. 05- cv- 2288) D i s tr i ctJ udge: H onor abl e M aryA . M cLaughl i n

____________________________________

________________ N o. 07- 4475

________________ STA N LEY J . CA TER BO N E; A D V A N CE D M ED I A G RO U P,

v. M R . R A N D A L L O . W E N G E R , o f th e L a n c a s t e rC o u n ty P r o th o n e t a ry; M A T T H E W B O M B E R G E R , O ffi ce of the Publ i c D efe nderof-2-

La n c a s t e rCou n ty ; J UD GE M I CH AEL G EOR GELI S, La n c a s t e rCou n ty ; LEO J . EC K ER T J R. , Lan c a s t e rCountyD i s tr i c tM a gi s tr a t e ; K ELL Y S. BALL ENT I NE, La n c a s t e rCo u n tyDi s tr i c tM a g i s tr a t e ; M AYN ARD H A M I LTO N , J R. , Lan c a s t e rCountyD i s tr i c tM a gi s tr a t e ; D EN I SE C O M M I N S, Lan c a s t e rCountyD i s tr i c tM a gi s tr a t e J ud ge ; RI CH A RD H . SI M M S, L a n c a ste r C o u n tyD istric t M a g istra te; S T E V E N M Y L IN , L a n c a ste r C o u n ty D istric t M a g istra te; W IL L IA M G . R E U T E R , L a n c a ste r C o u n ty D i s tr i ctM agi s tr at e; M I C H A E L SM I T H , D al phi n C ountyD i s tr i ctM agi s tr at e; O F F IC E R R O N A L D B E Z Z A R D , o f th e E a st L a m p e ter P o lice D e p a rtm e n t; O FFICE R T H O M A S G J U R I C H , of the Lancas t erC i tyB ur eau of Pol i ce; O F F IC E R A D A M C R A M E R , o f th e S o u th e rn R e g io n a l P o lic e D e p t.; C H I E F JO H N FI O R I L L ; O FFICE R R O B E R T B U SE R , of the Southern R egi onal Pol i ce D epart m ent ; O FFICE R R O B E R T M . FE D O R , of the Southern R egi onal Pol i ce D e p a rtm e n t; R O B E R T B O U R N E , o f th e S o u th e rn R e g io n a l P o lice D e p a rtm e n t; J OLYNN ST EI NM AN, P o s t ma s t e r , Co n e s t o g a P o s tOf f i c e ; NEL S ON BREWST ER, I n v e s t i g a t o r , o f

th e P A Att o rn e yGe n e r a l Of f i c e ; OF F I CE R MI CH AE L K. S C H A E F E R ; L U IS F U R IN A ; D O N A L D T O T A R O , L a n c a ste r C o u n ty D istric t A tto rn e y ; D E T E C T IV E M IC H A E L L . L A N D IS , L a n c a ste r C o u n ty St anl eyJ . C at erbone, A ppel l ant

____________________________________ O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e E a ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C . C i vi l A ct i on N o. 06- cv- 04650) D i s tr i ctJ udge: H onor abl e M aryA . M cLaughl i n

____________________________________ Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

Sept ember26, 2008 B efor e: SL O V I T E R , B A R R Y and N Y G A A R D , C i r cui tJ udges

( Fi l ed: Sept ember30, 2008 )

___________________ OP I NI ON

___________________-3-

P E R C UR I AM S tanleyJ. C aterb o n e a p p ea ls from the d ism issals of tw o civil case s fo r his fa il u re t o compl yw i th t he D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s or der s . Forthe r eas ons thatfol l ow , w e w i l l vaca t e and r emand t o t he D i s tr i ctC our tforfur thercons i der at i on. I. In M a y2 0 0 5 , C a terb o n e su e d L a n c a ste r C o u n typ riso n a n d o th e rs a ss e rtin g th a t h is c o n s t i tu t i o n a l r i g h t s , s h a r e h o l d e rr i g h t s , c i v i l l i b e r t i e s a n d “ r i g h to f d u e a c c e s s t o th e l a w” w e re v io late d (E .D . P a . C iv . N o . 0 5 -c v -0 2 2 8 8 ). S e v e ra l o f th e D e f e n d a n ts m o v e d to d ism iss th e c o m p lain t an d o n Ju n e 1 3 , 2 0 0 6 , the D istric t C o u rt g ra n ted th e m o tio n s to di s m i s s and al s o di s m i s s ed the compl ai ntas t o the non- m ovi ng D efe ndant s beca us e they w er e neve rpr oper l ys erved. T he fol l ow i ng day , C at erbone fi l ed a doc um entw hi ch the D i s tr i ctC our tcons trued as a r eques tforl eave t o fi l e an a m ended c om pl ai nt . T he D i s tr i ct C our tgr ant ed the r eques tand s ubs equent l ys eta dea dl i ne of A ugus t20, 2006, forfi l i ng a n a m e n d e d c o m p lain t. T h e D istric t C o u rt in d ica ted th a t itw o u ld d ism iss th e c a se w ith p re ju d ic e if C a te rb o n e f

a ile d to f ile a n a m e n d e d c o m p la in t b yth e d e a d lin e . A ft ergr ant i ng thr ee c ont i nuance s , the D i s tr i ctC our ts etan O ct ober15, 2007 d e a d lin e , ag a in w a rn in g C a terb o n e th a t f a ilu re to c o m p lyw o u ld re su lt i n d ism iss a l w ith pr ej udi ce. T he D i s tr i ctC our tal s o s t at ed thati tw oul d notgr antanyaddi t i onal ext ens i ons of t i m e. O n O ct ober15, 2007, C at erbone fi l ed a r ambl i ng, s i xty - thr ee pa ge “A m endment t o C om plai nt and M oti on for C on t i nu ance,” as ser t i ng thirty -ei gh tcauses of ac t i on against-4-

s ever al dozen de fenda nt s and r eques t i ng an addi t i onal s i xtyday s t o fi l e anotheramended com plai nt. O n O ct ob er 23, 20 07 , the D i stri ctC ou rti ssued an order deny i ng the requ est and di s m i s s i ng the ca s e w i th pr ej udi ce. T he D i s tr i ctC our texpl ai ned i n i t s or derthatt he i ncompl et e compl ai nts ubm i t t ed byC at erbone di d notcons t i tut e a va l i d amended compl ai nt , and thathe had f ai l ed t o fi l e a va l i d amended compl ai nti n the s i xt een mont hs s i nce he w as gr ant ed l eave t o do s o. C at erbone fi l ed a not i ce of appea l , and the appe al w a s d o c k e te d a t C .A . N o . 0 7 -4 4 7 4 . C at erbone comm ence d a s econd a ct i on on O ct ober18, 2006, byfi l i ng a compl ai nt as s ert i ng fede r al ci vi l r i ght s and R I C O cl ai m s agai ns ttw enty - fi ve def endant s ( E . D . Pa. Ci v . No . 0 6 - c v - 0 4 6 5 0 ) . Ca t e rb o n e r e q u e s t e d a n d wa s g r a n t e d l e a v e t o p r o c e e d i n f o r ma pauper i s . O n N ovember17, 2006, the D i s tr i ctC our ti s s ued an or derdi r ect i ng C at erbone t o fi l e an a m ended c om pl ai ntcont ai ni ng a more defi ni t e s t at ementof hi s cl ai m s orfac e di s m i s s al pur s uantt o 28 U . S. C . § 1915( e) ( 2) ( B ) ( i i ) . T he D i s tr i ctC our tal s o gr ant ed C at erbone’ s m ot i on forcont i nuance , pl aci ng the ca s e i n ci vi l s us pens e unt i l A pr i l 19, 2007. A ft ergr ant i ng tw o addi t i onal cont i nuance s , the D i s tr i ctC our tdi r ect ed hi m t o fi l e a sta tu s re p o rt o n o r b e f

o re A u g u st 3 1 , 2 0 0 7 . O n S e p tem b e r 1 2 , 2 0 0 7 , in r e sp o n se to C at erbone’ s s t atus r eportr eques t i ng an addi t i onal cont i nuance , the D i s tr i ctC our ti s s ued an or derdeny i ng the r eques tand di r ect i ng hi m t o s erve hi s amended compl ai nton the defe ndant s on orbefor e O ct ober15, 2007, not i ng thatthe ca s e had be en pendi ng for near l ya y earand thathe had noty ets erved anyof the def endant s . O n O ct ober15, 2007,-5-

he fi l ed the s ame si xty - thr ee pa ge documentthathe fi l ed i n E . D . Pa. N o. 05- 2288, w hi ch in c lu d e d a n id e n tic a l r e q u e s t f o r a n a d d itio n a l s ix ty d a y s to f ile a n a m e n d e d c o m p la in t. O n O ct ober23, 2007, the D i s tr i ctC our tent er ed an or derdi s m i s s i ng the ca s e bec aus e he h a d f a iled to se rv e h is c o m p lain t as d ire c ted in th e p re v io u s o rd e r. C a terb o n e ’s a p p e a l in thi s cas e w as docket ed atC . A . N o. 07- 4475. T he tw o appea l s have be en cons ol i dat ed for di s pos i t i on. II. B efor e w e di s cus s the mer i t s of the ca s e w e mustfi r s tdet erm i ne w hetherw e have j ur i s di ct i on overthe appe al s . A ppel l ees Ful t on B ank and M anhei m T ow ns hi p Pol i ce D epart m enthave f

i l ed mot i ons t o di s m i s s forl ack of j ur i s di ct i on, ar gui ng that C at erbone’ s not i ce of

appea l i n C . A . 07- 4474 w as unt i m el yfi l ed. C at erbone has fi l ed re s p o n s e s a s s e rt in g th a t th e n o tic e o f a p p e a l w a s tim e ly in b o th c a s e s . I n a ci vi l cas e s uch as thi s one, a not i ce of appea l m us tbe fi l ed w i thi n 30 day s of the entryof the D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s j udgm entoror der . See Fed. R . A pp. P. 4( a) ( 1) ( A ) . T he t i m e l i m i t s pr es cr i bed forfi l i ng a not i ce of appea l i n a ci vi l cas e ar e “mandat oryand juri sd ict ion al. ” B o w les v . R u ssell, 1 2 7 S . C t. 2 3 6 0 , 2 3 6 3 (20 0 7 ). B o th o f C aterb o n e’s cas es w er e di s m i s s ed on O ct ober23, 2007, and he f i l ed not i ces of appe al on N ovember 23, 2007, or31 day s aft erthe O ct ober23 or der s . N ovember22, how ever , w as the T h a n k sg iv in g h o lid a y ; th e re f o re , C a terb o n e h a d u n til th e f o llo w in g d a yto c o m p lyw ith th e th ir ty-d a yd e a d lin e f o r f ilin g a n o tic e o f

a p p e a l. S e e F e d . R . A p p . P . 2 6 (a )( 1 )- (4 ).-6-

T hus , the not i ces of appe al w er e t i m el yfi l ed. A ccor di ngl y , w e denyA ppel l ees ’ m ot i ons t o di s m i s s the appe al s forl ack of j ur i s di ct i on.

III . W e h av e jurisdicti o n u n d er 2 8 U . S . C . § 1 2 9 1 , an d w e re v iew the D istri ct C o u rt ’s d ism issals fo r ab u se o f d iscreti o n . M ind ek v . R igatti , 9 6 4 F . 2 d 1 3 6 9 , 1 3 7 3 (3d C ir . 1 9 9 2 ). U nderFeder al R ul e of Ci vi l Pr ocedur e 41( b) , a di s tr i ctcourtm aydi s m i s s an ac t i on s ua s pont e i f a l i t i gantfai l s t o compl yw i th a courtor derort o pr os ecut e hi s cas e. See L i nk v. W abas h R . R . C o. , 370 U . S. 626, 630- 31 ( 1962) . B efor e di s m i s s i ng an ac t i on, how ever , a di s tr i ctcourts houl d det erm i ne the pr opr i etyof puni t i ve di s m i s s al s i n l i ghtof the f ac tors o u tl ined in P o u li s v . S tat e F arm F ir e a n d C as. C o . , 7 4 7 F . 2 d 8 6 3 (3d C ir . 1984) . T he fa ct or s ar e: 1) the ext entof the party ’ s per s onal r es pons i bi l i ty ; 2) the pr ej udi ce t o t he opponent ; 3) anyhi s t oryof di l at or i nes s ; 4) w hetherthe conduc tof the partyorthe att orneyw as w i l l ful ori n bad fa i th; 5) w hethereff ect i ve al t ernat i ve s anct i ons ar e ava i l abl e; and 6) the mer i t or i ous nes s of the cl ai m ordefe ns e. I d. at868. O nl yi n the r a r e s to f c i r c u m s t a n c e s , th o s e d e m o n s tr a t i n g th e m o s tc o n tu m a c i o u s o f c o n d u c t , m a y a di s tr i ctcourtdi s pens e w i th t he Poul i s fac t or s al t ogether . See G uy erv. B ear d, 907 F. 2d 1 4 2 4 , 1 4 2 9 -30 (3d C ir . 1 9 9 0 ); see also S p ain v . G all eg o s, 2 6 F . 3 d 4 3 9 , 4 5 4 -55 (3d C ir . 1 9 9 4 ). W e h a v e re p e a ted lye m p h a siz e d th a t th e “ d ra stic sa n c tio n ” o f d ism iss a l is di s favor ed exc epti n t he mostegr egi ous ci r cumst ance s . See U ni t ed St at es v.-7-

$ 8 , 2 2 1 , 8 7 7 . 1 6 in U . S . C u rren cy , 3 3 0 F . 3 d 1 4 1 , 1 6 1 (3d C ir . 2 0 0 3 ). T he D i s tr i ctC our terr ed bydi s m i s s i ng C at erbone’ s s ui t s w i thoutanal y zi ng the P o u lis f a c to rs. W h ile it is tru e , as A p p e llee s a rg u e , tha t C a terb o n e d e layed f ili n g h is amended compl ai nt s fors ever al m onths , s uch beha vi orcannotbe cha r act er i zed a s “fl agrantbad fai th. ” S ee A dam s v. T rust ees of N . J. B rew eryE m ploy ees’ P ensi on T rust F u n d , 2 9 F .3 d 8 6 3 , 8 7 5 (3 d C ir . 1 9 9 4 ) ( in te rn a l q u o ta tio n m a rk s a n d c ita tio n o m itte d ). A ft eral l , the D i s tr i ctC our tgr ant ed, and C at erbone r el i ed on, cont i nuance s . N ori s thi s an i nst ance w here C at erbone aban do ned the case (Sp ai n) or w here hi s behav i or w as so e g re g io u s a s to a m o u n t to a n a b a n d o n m e n t o f th e c a se (G u y e r). T o th e c o n tra ry , it appea r s thatC at erbone made a good- fai th eff or tt o fi l e an a m ended c om pl ai nt . See D onnel l yv. J ohns - M anvi l l e Sal es C orp. , 677 F. 2d 339, 343 ( 3d C i r . 1982) ( behavi ornot contum aci ous w her e ef for tm ade t o compl yw i th courtor der ) . W e do notfi nd that C at erbone’ s conductw as s o contum aci ous thatthe D i s tr i ctC our tcoul d pr ocee d under F e d . R . C iv . P . 4 1 (b ) w ith o u t a n a lyzi n g th e P o u lis f a c to rs a t a ll. T he D i s tr i ctC our tal s o i m pr oper l ydi s m i s s ed C at erbone’ s s ui ti n 06- cv- 04650 by ci t i ng C at erbone ’s fai l ure t o serve process. A s a l i t i gan tproceed i ng i n fo rm a pau peri s, C at erbone w as notr es pons i bl e forthe s ervi ce of pr oces s . See 28 U . S. C . § 1915( d) ( “the offi cer s of the courts hal l i s s ue and s erve al l pr oces s . . . ”) ; s ee a l s o W el ch v. Fol s om , 925 F. 2d 666, 670 ( 3d C i r . 1991) ( di s tr i ctcourterr ed bydi s m i s s i ng compl ai nton the gr ound thata pl ai nt i ff pr ocee di ng i n form a paupe r i s fai l ed t o s erve the def endant ) . O nce-8-

C a terb o n e f

iled h is a m e n d e d c o m p lain t, th e D istric t C o u rt w a s o b lig a ted to a p p o in t a U ni t ed St at es m ar s hal t o eff ects ervi ce. Fed. R . C i v. P. 4( c) ( 3) . I n anyevent , i tm aybe thatthe di s m i s s al i n 06- cv- 04650 w as pr om pt ed bythe s ame concerns m ot i vat i ng the c o u rt in 0 5 -c v -0 2 2 8 8 . Forthes e r eas ons , w e w i l l vaca t e the D i s tr i ctC our t ’ s or der s di s m i s s i ng C at erbone’ s compl ai nt s and r emand t he ca s es forfur therpr ocee di ngs . W e emphas i ze that w e a re n o t h o ld in g th a t th e P o u lis f a c to rs d icta te s o m e th in g les s th a n d ism iss a l in th is c a se ; w e h o ld o n lyth a t th e D istric t C o u rt m u st, a t th is s tag e , p e rf o rm a P o u lis a n a ly sis to g u id e its e x e rc ise o f

d isc re tio n . G iv e n th a t C a terb o n e f iled id e n tica l am e n d e d c o m p lain ts i n both cas es , the D i s tr i ctC our tm ayw i s h t o cons i derw hetherthe ca s es s houl d be c o n s o lid a te d o n re m a n d .