Jones v. Ward et al

Filing 70

ORDER re Defendants' Motions to Strike portions of the Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Docs. 67 , 69 ). The Motions were filed because Plaintiff included the word "substantive" in both the caption of Claim IV and paragraph 73 of the 65 Amended Complaint. This Court's 44 Memorandum Opinion and Order dated 3/30/2011 dismissed with prejudice the Plaintiff's substantive due process claims. It is ORDERED that: 1. The Defendants' 67 Motion to Strike and 69 M otion to Strike are GRANTED. 2. The Plaintiff's 65 Amended Complaint is STRICKEN from the record. 3. The Plaintiff shall file a Second Amended Complaint on or before 6/14/2011. The Second Amended Complaint shall not contain any references to a substantive due process claim. Signed by Honorable Judge Mark E. Fuller on 6/9/2011. (dmn)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
DONNA JONES,
Plaintiff,
v.
FRED HAMIC, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 1:10-cv-202-MEF

(WO)

ORDER
This cause is before the Court on the Defendants’ Motions to Strike portions of
the Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint. (Docs. # 67, 69). The Motions were filed because
Plaintiff included the word “substantive” in both the caption of Claim IV and paragraph
73 of the Amended Complaint. (Doc. # 65). This Court’s Memorandum Opinion and
Order dated March 30, 2011 (Doc. # 44) dismissed with prejudice the Plaintiff’s
substantive due process claims.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. The Defendants’ Motions to Strike (Docs. # 67, 69) are GRANTED.
2. The Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. # 65) is STRICKEN from the
record.
3. The Plaintiff shall file a Second Amended Complaint on or before June
14th , 2011. The Second Amended Complaint shall not contain any

references to a substantive due process claim.
Done this the 9th day of June, 2011.
/s/ Mark E. Fuller
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2