Peera v. The City of Montgomery et al
ORDER granting 30 Motion for More Definite Statement; requiring Plaintiff to file a statement by October 30, 2009 which sets forth specific information about his defendants and claims as further set out in order. Signed by Honorable Myron H. Thompson on 10/23/2009. (br, )
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
JIM PEERA, Plaintiff, v. THE CITY OF MONTGOMERY, et al., Defendants.
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:09cv158-MHT (WO)
On February 26, 2009, plaintiff Jim Peera filed a complaint against a number of defendants, including the City of Montgomery, Montgomery Mayor Bobby Bright, and several municipal employees. On March 24, 2009, the
defendants filed a motion for a more definite statement. The court heard oral argument on this motion from the parties on April 16. The next day, April 17, the court
granted the defendants' motion and ordered Peera "to file an amended complaint that addresses ALL the concerns raised by the court during the hearing on April 16,
2009." Order (Doc. No. 28). complaint on April 30. This lawsuit is now
Peera filed an amended
defendants' second motion for a more definite statement. The defendants "submit unto this Court that they are still unable to properly formulate a responsive pleading without knowing what causes of action Plaintiff intends to bring against named Defendants." Defs.' Mot. at 1-2 (Doc. No. 30). Although the shadowy outlines of a claim or two are visible in Peera's amended complaint, the court fully shares in the defendants' struggle to understand the legal and factual basis for the myriad claims Peera has apparently attempted to assert. The court does not
condone sloppy legal work, but nor does it wish to see legitimate claims lost due to lawyer inadequacy. Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows: (1) The defendants' second motion for a more definite statement (doc. no. 30) is granted.
(2) By October 30, 2009, plaintiff Jim Peera is to file a statement that set forths, with respect to each defendant, the following: (a) The name of the defendant. (b) defendant. (c) For each claim against that defendant, cite to the specific law (statute or case) that supports that claim. (d) For each claim against that defendant, set forth the elements of that claim with supporting List the specific claims against that
citations to case or cases listing those elements. (e) For each claim against that defendant, set forth in detail the specific alleged facts that
demonstrate that the defendant engaged in conduct that establishes all the elements of the claim. Perhaps with this information, the court will be able to discern exactly what claim or claims plaintiff Peera is attempting to assert against each defendant and, thus,
will be able to discern what plaintiff needs to set forth in an amended complaint. DONE, this the 23rd day of October, 2009. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?