Jablonski v. Martin et al
Filing
70
ORDER dismissing case. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b), this action is DISMISSED for Plaintiff's failure to comply with the Court's Orders, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of this District. The Clerk is directed to TERMINATE any pending motions or deadlines, ENTER judgment accordingly, and CLOSE this file. Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 8/1/2016. (LMF)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
EDWARD J. JABLONSKI,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No: 2:15-cv-383-FtM-38CM
CHRISTOPHER W. MARTIN, TODD
M. LONERGAN and MARTIN,
DISIERE, JEFFERSON & WISDOM,
Defendants.
/
ORDER1
This matter comes before the Court on sua sponte review of Plaintiff Edward
Jablonski’s Second Amended Complaint (Doc. #68) filed on July 22, 2016. The Court
has carefully reviewed the Second Amended Complaint, and Plaintiff has again submitted
the type of pleading the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are designed to prevent.
Rule 8 requires a complaint to "contain a short and plain statement of the claim
showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556
U.S. 662, 678 (2009) ("[T]he pleading standard Rule 8 announces does not require
'detailed factual allegations,' but it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendantunlawfully-harmed-me accusation."). Rule 10 further provides, "[i]f doing so would
promote clarity, each claim founded on a separate transaction or occurrence . . . must be
1
Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites. These
hyperlinks are provided only for users’ convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in
CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other websites, this Court does not endorse,
recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their
websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their websites. The
Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a
hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court.
stated in a separate count[.]" Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). Rules 8 and 10 work together and
"'require the pleader to present his claims discretely and succinctly, so that his adversary
can discern what he is claiming and frame a responsive pleading, the court can determine
which facts support which claims and whether the plaintiff has stated any claims upon
which relief can be granted, and, at trial, the court can determine that evidence which is
relevant and that which is not.'" Fikes v. City of Daphne, 79 F.3d 1079, 1082 (11th Cir.
1996) (citation omitted).
Plaintiff initiated this action in June 2015. Since that time, the Court has dismissed
Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. #2) and Amended Complaint (Doc. #39) for, among other
reasons, failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Doc. #20; Doc.
#59). After the second dismissal, the Court warned Plaintiff that failure to comply with the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of this District for a third time would
result in this action being dismissed. (Doc. #59). Unfortunately, Plaintiff did not heed this
warning. Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint, like the previous complaints, represents
a confusing mixture of allegations with relevant facts, irrelevant facts, disjointed narrative,
conclusory accusations, and legal argument. (Doc. #68). As such, the Second Amended
Complaint fails to satisfy the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Local Rules of this
District. Therefore, the Court finds good cause to dismiss this action for failure to comply
with this Court’s Orders, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of this
District. See Betty K Agencies, Ltd. v. M/V Monada, 432 F.3d 1333, 1337 (11th Cir. 2005)
(noting that a district court may sua sponte dismiss an action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
41(b) if the plaintiff fails to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or a court
order).
2
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
1. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b), this action is DISMISSED for Plaintiff’s failure
to comply with the Court’s Orders, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and
the Local Rules of this District.
2. The Clerk is directed to TERMINATE any pending motions or deadlines,
ENTER judgment accordingly, and CLOSE this file.
DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida, this 1st day of August, 2016.
Copies: All Parties of Record
3
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?