Cobb v. State of Alabama, Department of Human Resources et al
(VACATED PER 20 ORDER) ORDERED that 18 Objection to the Recommendation for the Magistrate Judge is OVERRULED; (2) The 17 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED in part and REJECTED in part as set out; (3) Defendant's 5 Motion to Dimiss, or int he Alternative, for More Definite Statement is DENIED insofar as it seeks dismissal of the complaint prior to amendment but GRANTED as to the Request for a more definite statement; (4) Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Amend ed Complaint is GRANTED; (5) Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint is GRANTED; (6) Plaintiff is DIRECTED to show cause why 14 Motion to Dismiss on Behalf of Deceased Party should not be GRANTED on or before Sep tember 30, 2009; and (7) Defendants' 9 Second Motion to Dismiss, 13 as supplemented, is DENIED to the extent that it seeks dismissal of this matter for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, but GRANTED to the extent that it seeks an Order requiring Plaintiff to make a more definite statement. Signed by Hon. Chief Judge Mark E. Fuller on 9/7/2009. (cb, ) Modified on 10/7/2009 (cb, ).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA OF N O R T H E R N DIVISION J A N IE D. COBB, ) ) P la in tif f , ) v. ) ) S T A T E OF ALABAMA, DEPARTMENT ) O F HUMAN RESOURCES, et al., ) ) D e f e n d a n ts. )
C A S E NO. 2:09-cv-226-MEF WO
A f te r an independent review of the file, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT and DECREE o f the Court that: 1 . The plaintiff's objection (Doc. #18) to the Recommendation of the Magistrate J u d g e filed on September 14, 2009 is OVERRULED; 2 . The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #17) entered on September 1 , 2009 is ADOPTED in part and REJECTED in part as set out below; 3 . Defendants' "Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, for More Difinite [sic] S ta te m e n t" (Doc. #5) is DENIED insofar as it seeks dismissal of the complaint prior to a m e n d m e n t but GRANTED as to the request for a more definite statement; 4. Plaintiff's "Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint" (Doc. #7) is
G RA N TED ; 5 . Plaintiff's "Motion to Amend Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint" (Doc. # 1 1 ) is GRANTED;
6. Plaintiff is DIRECTED to show cause why Defendants' Motion to Dismiss on B e h a lf of Deceased Party (Doc. #14) should not be GRANTED on or before September 30, 2009; 7 . Defendants' Second Motion to Dismiss (Doc. #9), as supplemented (Doc. #13), is D E N IE D to the extent that it seeks dismissal of this matter for failure to state a claim upon w h ic h relief can be granted, but GRANTED to the extent that it seeks an Order requiring P la in tif f to make a more definite statement; 8 . It is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge shall conduct a status conference a t his earliest convenience for the purpose of explaining to the pro se plaintiff the re s p o n s ib ilitie s she bears for articulating the basis of her claims in an amended complaint and th a t the Magistrate Judge shall set an appropriate deadline for the filing of an amended c o m p la in t making a more definite statement of her claims; and 9 . Plaintiff is cautioned that she is responsible for following the procedures applicable in this court and advised that this is her final chance to properly articulate her claims. D O N E this the 7th day of October, 2009.
/s/ Mark E. Fuller CHIEF 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?