WRIGHT v. BANK OF AMERICA
ORDER construing 20 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim as a motion for more definite statement and ordering Plaintiff to file an amended complaint by January 27, 2017. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE CLAY D LAND on 1/5/2017. (CCL)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.
CASE NO. 4:16-CV-87 (CDL)
O R D E R
Defendant Bank of America, N.A. (1) used a contract of adhesion
to deprive her of home ownership and (2) wrongfully deprived
Wright of an opportunity to cure a delinquency on her loan.
Compl. § III, ECF No. 1.
It is not clear from the Complaint
what claims Wright is attempting to assert.
And Wright did not
allege any facts to support her claims, such as facts regarding
her contract with the Bank, her delinquency on the loan, her
efforts to cure the delinquency, or how the Bank deprived her of
The Bank filed a motion to dismiss Wright’s Complaint for
failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
The Bank correctly asserts that Wright failed to
articulate a short and plain statement of her claims as required
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)(2).
The Bank also
“sufficient factual matter . . . to ‘state a claim to relief
that is plausible on its face.’”
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S.
662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S.
544, 570 (2007)).
Wright contends that she does not need to
allege specific facts in her Complaint.
She is wrong.
recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.”
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555.
Here, Wright’s Complaint simply does
not include sufficient factual allegations “to raise a right to
relief above the speculative level,” and it does not give the
Bank fair notice of what her claims are or the grounds on which
Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555.
In her response to the Bank’s motion to dismiss, Wright
definite statement under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(e).
Such a motion is appropriate when a pleading “is so vague or
ambiguous that the party cannot reasonably prepare a response.”
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(e).
Wright’s Complaint certainly suffers
opportunity to amend their complaint to cure deficiencies, the
Court construes the Bank’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 20) as a
motion for more definite statement, which is granted.
The Court orders Wright to file an amended complaint that
sets forth exactly what claims Wright is pursuing against the
Bank, along with basic factual allegations that support each
The amended complaint must be filed by January 27, 2017.
There will be no extensions of this deadline; if Wright does not
file her amended complaint by January 27, 2017, this action will
be dismissed for failure to prosecute and/or failure of her
complaint to state a claim.
Defendant will have the right to
file a new motion to dismiss any amended complaint filed by
should be dismissed.
IT IS SO ORDERED, this 5th day of January, 2017.
s/Clay D. Land
CLAY D. LAND
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
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?