Summary
This Report and Recommendation from the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida addresses a defendant’s motion to dismiss a pro se plaintiff’s amended complaint. The magistrate judge recommends granting the motion because the pleading constitutes an impermissible shotgun pleading that fails to satisfy federal pleading standards under Rules 8 and 10. Because the plaintiff was previously granted leave to amend but failed to cure the structural deficiencies, the court recommends dismissing the case with prejudice.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the complaint is a shotgun pleading that fails to meet the pleading standards of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2) and Rule 10(b) and therefore should be dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6).
- Whether the plaintiff adequately pleaded that the defendants are state actors for purposes of a §1983 claim.
Holdings
- The complaint is a shotgun pleading because it combines multiple counts without separating factual allegations, contains conclusory and immaterial facts, and fails to identify which defendant is responsible for which alleged conduct; therefore it must be dismissed.
- The plaintiff did not allege sufficient facts to show the defendants acted as state actors; the claim therefore fails as a matter of law.
Key quotations
““Complaints that violate either Rule 8(a)(2) or Rule 10(b), or both, are often disparagingly referred to as ‘shotgun pleadings.’”” (Doc. No. 43, at 1)
““A pro se complaint should be construed leniently, but a court does not have ‘license … to rewrite an otherwise deficient pleading [by a pro se litigant] in order to sustain an action.’”” (Doc. No. 43, at 1)
Factual background
Stephen Lynch Murray, pro se, alleged that Defendants Janelle Irwin Taylor, Peter D. Schorsch, and Extensive Enterprises Media, LLC defamed him by publishing an article about his arrest, asserting violations of 42 U.S.C. §1983 and several constitutional amendments.
Procedural history
Plaintiff filed a pro se 42 U.S.C. §1983 complaint on Jan. 22, 2024. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss alleging the complaint was a shotgun pleading. The magistrate issued a report and recommendation granting the motion and dismissing the complaint. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint, which was again found to be a shotgun pleading and dismissed.