Mothershed v. Oklahoma, State of et al

Filing 20

ORDER denying 16 Plaintiff's Motion to allow electronic filing. DISMISSING without prejudice the first amended complaint for violating Rule 8(a), Fed. R. Civ. P. Plaintiff shall have to and including April 20, 2012 to file a second amended complaint that complies with Rule 8(a), Fed. R. Civ. Signed by Judge Frederick J Martone on 4/3/12.(DMT)

1

WO

2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

George L. Mothershed,
Plaintiff,

10
11

vs.

12
State of Oklahoma et al,
13
Defendant.
14

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. CV 12-549-PHX-FJM
ORDER

15
16
The court has before it plaintiff's renewed Motion to allow electronic filing by a pro
17
se litigant. (Doc. 16). We denied the prior motion without prejudice to refiling upon the
18
filing of an amended complaint that complied with Rule 8(a), Fed. R. Civ. P. Order of Mar.
19
19, 2012. (Doc. 4). Plaintiff has now filed an amended complaint with 102 pages and 41
20
footnotes. While this is an improvement over the original complaint, the amended complaint
21
is not a short and plain statement of the claim. Instead, it is an historical document, covering
22
plaintiff's relationship to the Oklahoma bar over the years. One can comply with the
23
pleading requirements of Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009) without violating Rule
24
8(a), Fed. R. Civ. P. Moreover, the complaint is so riddled with issues involving jurisdiction,
25
venue, immunity, and the like that it is most unlikely that even a complaint that complied
26
with the Rules would survive in this District. Allowing electronic filing would only facilitate
27
litigation filed in the wrong forum.
28

1

Accordingly, it is ORDERED DISMISSING without prejudice the first amended

2

complaint for violating Rule 8(a), Fed. R. Civ. P. It is further ORDERED DENYING

3

plaintiff's Motion to allow electronic filing. (Doc. 16).

4

We once again urge plaintiff to seek the advice of a local lawyer. We also urge him

5

to file any second amended complaint in the proper district in Oklahoma, which is where this

6

case is likely to be transferred should a viable claim ever be stated.

7
8
9

At all events, plaintiff shall have to and including April 20, 2012 to file a second
amended complaint that complies with Rule 8(a), Fed. R. Civ. P.
DATED this 3rd day of April, 2012.

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-