Keys v. Royal Dutch Shell et al

Filing 25

ORDER -- The Amended Complaint (Doc. 20) is DISMISSED. On or before February 6, 2015, Plaintiff shall file a Second Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge Roy B. Dalton, Jr. on 1/23/2015. (VMF)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
CELESTE KEYS,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 6:14-cv-1161-Orl-37DAB

SHELL OIL COMPANY,
Defendant.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the following:
1.

Shell Oil Company’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint and
Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Doc. 21), filed December 22, 2014;
and

2.

Response to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint
(Doc. 24), filed January 16, 2015.
BACKGROUND

Defendant Shell Oil Company removed this personal injury action from state
court on July 18, 2014, based on diversity jurisdiction. (Doc. 1.) On November 20,
2014, Plaintiff Celeste Keys filed an Amended Complaint which alleges that Defendant
is liable to her based on Defendant’s design, manufacture, marketing, and distribution of
toluene. (Doc. 20.) Defendant moved to dismiss the Amended Complaint (Doc. 21), and
Plaintiff responded (Doc. 24). As explained below, the Court agrees with Defendant that
the Amended Complaint is due to be dismissed.

LEGAL STANDARDS
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure set forth minimum pleading requirements.
Rule 8 requires that a complaint consist of simple, concise and direct allegations, and a
short and plain statement of the claims. Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a), (d) (“Each allegation must be
simple, concise and direct.”). Under Rule 10, a plaintiff is required to set forth distinct
claims in separate counts and use numbered paragraphs, each limited to a single set of
circumstances:
A party must state its claims . . . in numbered paragraphs, each limited as
far as practicable to a single set of circumstances. A later pleading may
refer by number to a paragraph in an earlier pleading, if doing so would
promote clarity, each claim founded on a separate transaction or
occurrence . . . must be stated in a separate count.
Fed.R.Civ.P. 10(b).
When a complaint is so poorly drafted that the defendant cannot be expected to
frame a fair response, or if the complaint otherwise fails to state a claim that is plausible
on its face, the defendant may file a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6).
See Popham v. Cobb Cty., Ga., 392 Fed. App’x 677 (11th Cir. 2010); see also Ashcroft
v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 672, 678–79 (2009). Courts must accept all well-pled factual
allegations—but not legal conclusions—in the complaint as true. See Iqbal, 556 U.S. at
672 (citing Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). After disregarding
allegations that “are not entitled to the assumption of truth,” the court must determine
whether the complaint includes “factual content that allows the court to draw the
reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Iqbal, 556
U.S. at 679 (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 556).
DISCUSSION
The Amended Complaint plainly does not comply with the Court’s minimum

2

pleading requirements. (See Doc. 20.) Most importantly, Plaintiff lumps all of her
theories of recovery into a single section denoted “LIABILITY.” (Id. ¶¶ 32–45.) Such a
framework is obtuse, confusing, and fails to comply with the requirement that separate
claims be set forth in separate counts. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 10(b). The Amended
Complaint simply cannot serve as the foundation of a federal action, and Defendant
cannot be expected to respond to the Amended Complaint.
Although the deadline to amend pleadings has passed (Doc. 18, p. 1), the Court
will afford Plaintiff one additional opportunity to file an Amended Complaint in
compliance with minimum pleading requirements. Plaintiff is advised that if she files
another pleading in this action that lumps all her claims together, includes blatant
scrivener’s errors (such as referring to the Plaintiff by another name or gender or
incorrectly alleging facts that are basic to her claim—such as her diagnosed condition),
is organized in a “shotgun” fashion, or provides insufficient factual allegations to give
Defendant notice of the product(s) at issue and circumstances of Plaintiff’s alleged
exposure, then the Court will dismiss the pleading without leave to reassert and will
close this case. Plaintiff is further advised that if her Second Amended Complaint
includes a claim based on fraud, she must comply with the heightened pleading
requirements set forth in Rule 9(b) as to that claim.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1.

Shell Oil Company’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint and
Incorporated Memorandum of Law (Doc. 21) is GRANTED.

2.

The Amended Complaint (Doc. 20) is DISMISSED.

3.

On or before February 6, 2015, Plaintiff shall file a Second Amended

3

Complaint in compliance with the requirements of this Order and the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
4.

If Plaintiff fails to file a Second Amended Complaint in the time and
manner prescribed, then the Court will dismiss the deficient pleading (if
any) without leave to reassert and CLOSE this action without further
notice.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on January 23, 2015.

Copies:
Counsel of Record

4