Williams v. Alabama Postsecondary Education
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER re 6 MOTION for Reconsideration. Finding that the Amended Complaint does not conform to the requirements of the Court's 7 Order, the Court still declines to reconsider its Order of Dismissal. Signed by Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins on 4/15/2016. (JLC)
2016 Apr-15 PM 12:51
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
DONALD P. WILLIAMS,
EDUCATION, et al.,
) Case No.: 3:15-CV-1726-VEH
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is Plaintiff Donald P. Williams’s Amended Complaint. (Doc.
8). In this court’s order of March 16, 2016, the court declined to reconsider its
December 8, 2015, dismissal order. In the March 16 order, however, the court
indicated that it would reconsider its December 8 dismissal if Williams submitted an
amended complaint that complied with the court’s October 16, 2015 order for
repleader. Finding that the Amended Complaint does not conform to the requirements
of the October 16 order, the court still declines to reconsider its order of dismissal.
The court ordered Williams as follows in the October 16 order:
The amended complaint must comply with Rule 8.
Thus, it shall include “a short and plain statement of the
grounds for the court’s jurisdiction.” FED. R. CIV. P.
8(a)(1). It shall also include “a short and plain statement of
the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.”
FED. R. CIV. P. 8(a)(2). Williams must also include a
demand for relief sought in his amended complaint. FED R.
CIV. P. 8(a)(3). A complaint does not “suffice if it tenders
naked assertions devoid of further factual enhancement.”
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quotations and
The amended complaint shall comply with Rule 10.
It must “have a caption with the court’s name, a title, a file
number, and [indicate that it is a complaint]. The title of the
complaint must name all the parties.” FED. R. CIV. P. 10(a)
(alteration and emphasis added). Each legal claim against
each defendant must be specifically identified in separate
numbered paragraphs. FED. R. CIV. P. 10(b). Any particular
count must only describe one claim against one defendant,
and each count must include the pertinent supporting facts
in separately numbered paragraphs. See id.
(Doc. 2 at 2–3).
The Amended complaint lacks a demand for relief as required by FED. R. CIV.
P. 8(a)(3), and the factual allegations are largely unintelligible. Additionally, the
complaint fails to comply with Rule 10; it does not provide individualized counts
against individualized defendants. Finally, the complaint is not divided into
separately numbered paragraphs. In light of these deficiencies, the complaint does not
comply with the October 16 order.
The dismissal will not be reconsidered, and this action is hereby DISMISSED
DONE and ORDERED this 15th day of April, 2016.
VIRGINIA EMERSON HOPKINS
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?