The plaintiffs brought a motion for a status hearing to prevent their action from being administratively dismissed for delay under Rule 48.14.
The plaintiffs argued that the delay was caused by their former counsel's failure to advance the claim.
The court reviewed the timeline of the litigation and found that the plaintiffs failed to provide an adequate explanation for 38.5 months of delay, representing over 45% of the total time since the action commenced.
Balancing the interests of the parties, the court concluded that the excessive unexplained delay warranted dismissal, even without proof of actual prejudice to the defendants.
The plaintiffs' motion was dismissed, and the action was dismissed for delay.
