Court Opinion

ID: 9698658
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 19:56:41.062221+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:42.545957
License: Public Domain

MACK, Associate Judge,
dissenting:
Dismissal under Super.Ct.Civ.R. 41(b) is a harsh sanction — “ ‘a final and definitive doom’ precluding a preferred disposition on the merits.” Taylor v. Washington Hospital Center, D.C.App., 407 A.2d 585, 590 (1979) citing Garces v. Bradley, D.C.App., 299 A.2d 142, 144 (1973). We have suggested that a trial court is well-advised to consider applying a lesser sanction and that an appellate court may well find an abuse of discretion where there has been no showing that a defendant actually would be prejudiced by the delay. See Taylor, supra at 590. On the state of the record here — the absence of a showing of prejudice to the defendant, and the existence of activity, however abortive, I think dismissal sua sponte was inappropriate and an abuse of discretion.