Barron v. Spence et al
ORDER directing the Clerk of Court to send a blank 1983 complaint to Barron. Barron is directed to file the amended complaint conforming to this Order within 30 days. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patricia S. Harris on 9/15/2020. (jak)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
DEURSLA LASHAY BARRON
No: 3:20-cv-00255 DPM-PSH
CHELSIE SPENCE, et al.
Plaintiff Deursla Lashay Barron filed a pro se complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 on August 27, 2020, while incarcerated at the Craighead County Detention
Facility (Doc. No. 2). Barron has been granted in forma pauperis status (Doc. No.
3) and filed an amended complaint (Doc. No. 4). Before docketing the complaint,
or as soon thereafter as practicable, the Court must review the complaint to identify
cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint if it: (1) is frivolous or malicious; (2)
fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or (3) seeks monetary relief
against a defendant who is immune from such relief. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A.
In her complaint and amended complaint, Barron complains about multiple
issues at the Craighead County Detention Facility. It is difficult, however, to
understand what a defendant or defendants did that violated her constitutional rights.
The Court directs Barron to file an amended complaint on the § 1983 complaint form
that describes how defendants violated her constitutional rights, the specific role
each defendant had in the alleged constitutional violations, and the injuries she
sustained as a result of the alleged constitutional violations. Barron must also
describe only one factually related incident or issue. Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 18, a
plaintiff may bring multiple claims, related or not, against a single defendant. To
proceed against multiple defendants, plaintiff must satisfy Fed. R. Civ. P. 20, which
allows claims against multiple defendants when the claims against them arise out of
the same series of occurrences, and present questions of fact common to all
The Clerk of Court is directed to send a blank § 1983 complaint form to
Barron is cautioned that an amended complaint renders her existing
complaints without legal effect; only claims properly set out in the amended
complaint will be allowed to proceed. In the event Barron fails to file an amended
complaint conforming to this order within thirty days, this case may be dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 15th day of September, 2020.
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
See Mosley v. Gen. Motors Corp., 497 F.2d 1330, 1333 (8th Cir. 1974) (Rule 20
permits “all reasonably related claims for relief by or against different parties to be tried
in a single proceeding.”); see also Fulghum v. Allen, 2015 WL 5667479 at *1 (8th Cir.
2015); Harris v. Union Pacific R. Co., 2013 WL 1187719 (E.D. Ark. 2013); Langrell v.
Union Pacific R. Co., 2012 WL 3041312 (E.D. Ark. 2012).
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?