Dawkins v. United States of America
ORDER denying 3 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Complaint is Dismissed with leave to refile an Amended Complaint by 11/28/11. Signed by Judge William P. Dimitrouleas on 10/27/11. (tp)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 11-62303-CIV-DIMITROULEAS
ELKINO DENARDO DAWKINS, SR.
Magistrate Judge Snow
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiff Elkino Denardo Dawkins, Sr.’s
Complaint [DE 1], filed herein on October 26, 2011, and Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed
in Forma Pauperis [DE 3]. The Court has carefully reviewed the Complaint and is otherwise
fully advised in the premises.
Plaintiff’s barebones Complaint purports to allege violations of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by the
United States for treason, mutiny, tyranny, and conspiracy. He claims fourteen quadrillion dollars
Because Plaintiff is attempting to proceed in forma pauperis, this Court may screen
Plaintiff’s complaint and dismiss it if it fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted. See
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), (e). Although courts “do and should show a leniency to pro se litigants not
enjoyed by those with the benefit of a legal education,” GJR Investments, Inc. v. County of
Escambia, Fla., 132 F.3d 1359, 1369 (11th Cir. 1998); Powell v. Lennon, 914 F.2d 1459, 1463
(11th Cir. 1990), this leniency does not give a court license to serve as de facto counsel for a
party or to rewrite an otherwise deficient pleading in order to sustain an action. GJR
Investments, Inc., 132 F.3d at 1369; Pontier v. City of Clearwater, 881 F. Supp. 1565, 1568
(M.D. Fla. 1995). Rule 8(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires that a pleading shall
contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.”
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). Allegations that consist of nothing more than legal conclusions are
insufficient. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949-50 (2009). In his pro se Complaint, Plaintiff
has failed to clearly set forth his claims against the Defendant. Plaintiff’s complaint fails to
provide any factual information as to how the United States committed these alleged violations
and how Plaintiff was harmed; the entirety of the allegations are legal conclusions.
In Anderson v. District Board of Trustees of Central Florida Community College, 77 F.3d
364, 366-67 (11th Cir. 1996), the Eleventh Circuit, concerned about the ramifications of cases
proceeding on the basis of “shotgun” pleadings, noted:
Experience teaches that, unless cases are pled clearly and precisely, issues are not joined,
discovery is not controlled, the trial court’s docket becomes unmanageable, the litigants
suffer and society loses confidence in the court’s ability to administer justice.
See also Cesnik v. Edgewood Baptist Church, 88 F.3d 902, 905 (11th Cir. 1996); L.S.T. Inc. v.
Crow, 49 F.3d 679, 684 (11th Cir. 1995).
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. Plaintiff Elkino Denardo Dawkins, Sr.’s Complaint [DE 1] is hereby DISMISSED
with leave to refile an Amended Complaint by November 28, 2011, that comports with
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Southern District of Florida Local Rules, and
2. In redrafting an amended complaint, the Plaintiff shall set forth each legal claim in a
separate count. Further, each count shall state with specificity both the factual and legal
basis for each claim it sets forth. Other numbered paragraphs may be incorporated by
reference but this must be done with particular care so that only relevant paragraphs are
referenced. It is impermissible to attempt a wholesale incorporation by reference of all
preceding paragraphs. A failure to comply with this order may result in a dismissal with
prejudice of this action.
3. Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis [DE 3] is hereby DENIED
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this
27th day of October, 2011.
Copies furnished to:
1300 Washington Ave.
Miami Beach, FL 33139
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?