LaRue v. Staffmark
ORDER directing plaintiff to file within 30 days an amended complaint that complies with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff must state specific facts supporting her claim that Staffmark discriminated and retaliated against her. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 10/14/08. (jct)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION JODENE LARUE, Plaintiff, VS. STAFFMARK, Defendant. * * * * * * * * * * * Order On September 24, 2008, the Court directed plaintiff to file an amended complaint setting forth specific facts in support of her claims of discrimination and retaliation. In response, plaintiff filed a 53-page pleading which includes statements she provided to EEOC investigators as well as correspondence with attorneys she sought to retain. Plaintiff is required to be familiar and comply with all the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 8(a) provides that a pleading must contain "a short and plain statement" of the grounds showing the pleader is entitled to relief. The factual elements of plaintiff's claims against Staffmark are scattered throughout the 53-page pleading but are not organized into a "short and plain statement of the claim" against Staffmark as required by Rule 8(a). Therefore, the Court will dismiss plaintiff's complaint unless she files within thirty (30) days an amended complaint that complies with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.1 Plaintiff must state specific facts supporting
NO: 3:08CV00156 SWW
Plaintiff may choose to use another Title VII complaint form for her amended complaint, making sure this time to follow the instructions and provide all the information called for on the complaint form
her claim that Staffmark discriminated and retaliated against her.
SO ORDERED this 14th day of October 2008.
/s/Susan Webber Wright 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?