Short answer. Usually, yes. If you fail, without a justifiable reason, to appear on the date set for presenting your evidence, or you unreasonably delay your own case, the court can dismiss your complaint, and that dismissal is treated as an adjudication upon the merits — unless the court expressly declares otherwise.
What the law says
If, for no justifiable cause, the plaintiff fails to appear on the date of the presentation of his or her evidence in chief on the complaint, or to prosecute his or her action for an unreasonable length of time, or to comply with these Rules or any order of the court, the complaint may be dismissed upon motion of the defendant or upon the court's own motion, without prejudice to the right of the defendant to prosecute his or her counterclaim in the same or in a separate action. This dismissal shall have the effect of an adjudication upon the merits, unless otherwise declared by the court.
Rule 17, Section 3 — Dismissal due to fault of plaintiff. Read the full provision →
Why the rule is harsher than it sounds
An ordinary dismissal that isn't on the merits usually leaves you free to re-file the same claim later. A dismissal upon the merits does not. It closes the case the same way a full trial that you lost would, which means the doctrine that bars re-litigating a settled claim can apply against you. That is the entire point of this rule: failing to show up for your own evidence, or dragging your feet indefinitely, is treated as though you gave up the fight, not as a mere procedural lapse you can shrug off and try again next year.
What has to happen before it applies
The dismissal under this rule is triggered by the plaintiff's own default, not the defendant's, and it requires either a failure to appear when it's your turn to present evidence, a failure to prosecute the action for an unreasonable length of time, or a failure to comply with the Rules or a court order. Critically, the failure to appear must be without justifiable cause. If you had a valid, timely-explained reason for missing the hearing, that goes to whether the dismissal should have been ordered in the first place.
Who can move for it, and what survives
The dismissal can come on the defendant's motion or on the court's own initiative — you do not need your opponent to ask for it before a judge acts. Even so, the defendant does not lose anything by your case being dismissed: the rule expressly preserves the defendant's right to prosecute any counterclaim already on file, whether in that same case or in a separate action. So a dismissal that ends your claim does not automatically end the whole controversy between you and the other side.
The escape hatch: the court can say otherwise
The "upon the merits" consequence is the default, not an absolute rule. The text closes with "unless otherwise declared by the court" — meaning the judge dismissing your case can expressly state that the dismissal is without prejudice, leaving you free to refile. Whether a court will do that depends on the circumstances of the default and is decided case by case, so if you are facing this kind of dismissal, the wording of the actual dismissal order matters as much as the fact of the dismissal itself.