King v. Viva Beverages

Filing 15

ORDER denying 10 Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 4/27/2016. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
PLAINTIFF

NANCY KING

v.

No. 5:15-cv-299-DPM
DEFENDANT

VIV A BEVERAGES
ORDER

Ms. King didn't respond to Viva Beverages' motion to dismiss. But the
motion lacks any merit. The company asks the Court to dismiss King's suit
because she used the wrong prose form-because, after paying $400 to file
suit, she made an ADA claim with a Title VII form. That doesn't matter. Pro

se folks don't have to plead "with legal nicety." Topchian v. JPMorgan Chase
Bank N.A., 760 F.3d 843, 849 (8th Cir. 2014). They must give the other side fair
notice of claims. The company's motion is premised on the fact that King did
so. Requiring her to find and file another form at this point would slow down
the case without good reason. FED. R. CIV. P. 1. Motion, Ng 10, denied.
So Ordered.

ff.

D.P. Marshall
United States District Judge