Tomasic et al v. Travelers Insurance et al
Filing
8
ORDERED: Plaintiffs' 1 Complaint is STRICKEN. Plaintiffs shall file an amended complaint consistent with the directives of this Order on or before January 4, 2016. Plaintiffs are cautioned that failure to do so may result in a dismissal of this action. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Marcia Morales Howard on 12/22/2015. (APH)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
JACKSONVILLE DIVISION
JOHN F. TOMASIC and
KATHERINE A. HOOVER,
Owners of Sunny,
Plaintiffs,
Case No. 3:15-cv-1481-J-34MCR
vs.
TRAVELERS INSURANCE, BRAD
EUBANK, and SOUTHERN DRYDOCK,
INC., DIP (insured),
Defendants.
/
ORDER
THIS CAUSE is before the Court sua sponte. Plaintiffs, who are proceeding pro se,
initiated the instant action on December 15, 2015, by filing a four-count Complaint for Bad
Faith Tort (Doc.1; Complaint). Upon review, the Court finds that the Complaint constitutes
an impermissible “shotgun pleading.” A shotgun complaint “contains several counts, each
one incorporating by reference the allegations of its predecessors, leading to a situation
where most of the counts . . . contain irrelevant factual allegations and legal conclusions.”
Strategic Income Fund, L.L.C. v. Spear, Leeds & Kellogg Corp., 305 F.3d 1293, 1295 (11th
Cir. 2002). Consequently, in ruling on the sufficiency of a claim, the Court is faced with the
onerous task of sifting out irrelevancies in order to decide for itself which facts are relevant
to a particular cause of action asserted. See id. Here, each subsequent count of the four
counts in the Complaint realleges all of the allegations of the preceding counts. See
generally Complaint.
In the Eleventh Circuit, shotgun pleadings of this sort are “altogether unacceptable.”
Cramer v. State of Fla., 117 F.3d 1258, 1263 (11th Cir. 1997); see also Cook v. Randolph
Cnty., 573 F.3d 1143, 1151 (11th Cir. 2009) (“We have had much to say about shotgun
pleadings, none of which is favorable.”) (collecting cases).
As the Court in Cramer
recognized, “[s]hotgun pleadings, whether filed by plaintiff or defendants, exact an
intolerable toll on the trial court’s docket, lead to unnecessary and unchanneled discovery,
and impose unwarranted expense on the litigants, the court and the court’s parajudicial
personnel and resources.” Cramer, 117 F.3d at 1263. When faced with the extreme
burden of deciphering a shotgun pleading, it is the trial court’s obligation to strike the
pleading on its own initiative, and force the plaintiff to replead to the extent possible under
Rule 11, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See id. (admonishing district court for not
striking shotgun complaint on its own initiative); see also United States ex rel. Atkins v.
McInteer, 470 F.3d 1350, 1354 n.6 (11th Cir. 2006) (“When faced with a shotgun pleading,
the trial court, whether or not requested to do so by a party’s adversary, ought to require
the party to file a repleader.”) (citing Byrne v. Nezhat, 261 F.3d 1075, 1133 (11th Cir. 2001),
abrogated on other grounds as recognized by Douglas Asphalt Co. v. QORE, Inc., 657
F.3d 1146, 1151-52 (11th Cir. 2011)). Accordingly, because the instant Complaint is an
impermissible shotgun pleading, the Court will strike it and allow Plaintiffs to file an
amended complaint.
In light of the foregoing, it is ORDERED:
1.
Plaintiffs’ Complaint for Bad Faith Tort (Doc. 1) is STRICKEN.
2.
Plaintiffs shall file an amended complaint consistent with the directives of this
Order on or before JANUARY 4, 2016. Failure to do so may result in a dismissal of this
action.
3.
Defendants shall respond to the amended complaint in accordance with the
requirements of Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida this 22nd day of December, 2015.
lc20
Copies to:
Counsel of Record
Pro se Parties
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?