King v. Viva Beverages

Filing 15

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

Download PDF
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

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?