elaga-bey v. Matthews et al

Filing 31

ORDER denying without prejudice 10 Motion to Dismiss; denying as moot 15 Motion to Amend/Correct, 19 Motion to Strike, and 22 Motion for Judicial Notice. The Court Orders Plaintiff to amend his complaint to include all of his allegations in one document within twenty-one days of the date of this Order. Signed by Chief Judge J. Randal Hall on 09/20/2017. (Attachments: # 1 Blank complaint form) (thb)

IN THE UNITED

STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
AUGUSTA DIVISION

TAQI ELAGA-BEY,

Plaintiff,
CV

v.

116-146

KIMBERLEY MATTHEWS of Aldridge
Pite,

LLP;

KATE HARRENSTEIN of

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.; and
GERLINDE BERRY of Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A.,
Defendants.

ORDER

Plaintiff,1

proceeding

September

6,

2016.

Plaintiff

nebulously

pro

(Doc.
alleged

se,

1.)

initiated

In

that

Superior Court of Richmond County,

the

his

this

original

Clerk

Georgia,

of

case

on

complaint,

Court

for

the

violated Plaintiff's

constitutional rights by action and/or inaction taken with regard
to a

civil action filed by Plaintiff in that

court in December

1 Plaintiff - born Stephen Anthony Lee - initiated this case under the name of

"Taqi Elaga-Bey", which he claims to have "declared [as] his national title"
without

court

intervention in 2013.

(See Doc.

1;

see also Doc.

24.)

In a

subsequent filing, Plaintiff informed the Court that he shall henceforth be
known as "Taqi El", which he allegedly "proclaimed [as] his legal name" in
2017.

(Doc.

24,

at

1.)

transacted business under -

Doc. 21.)
house in

Plaintiff

also

appears

to

have

the name "Taqi El Agabey" at

assumed

some point.

-

and
(See

Notably, Plaintiff initiated a similar action with regards to his
2016 - using the moniker ":stephen-anthony:lee" - which he

subsequently voluntarily dismissed without prejudice.
See Lee v. Johnson,
1:16-CV-031, Doc. 8 (S.D. Ga. Apr. 26, 2016).
Plaintiff also initiated a
similar action with regards to his automobile in 2017 - under the name "Taqi
El" which was
subsequently dismissed for
lack of subject matter

jurisdiction.
CV-052,

Doc. 11

See El v. North Carolina State Employees' Credit Union, 1:17(S.D. Ga. May 31, 2017).

2014.

(Id.)

Plaintiff

also

alleged

therein

that

Wells

Fargo

Home Mortgage ("WFHM")2 and/or Aldridge Pite, LLP ("AP") breached
an

alleged

release
legal

contract

[the]

tender

formed

Property
of

with

payment

by

after

Lien

Plaintiff

accepting

and/or

...

in

full

"fail[ing]

to

refusing

satisfaction of

the

a

debt

and . . . the simple contract received by Bank prior to payment."

(Id.

at

8).

injunction

Plaintiff
to

residence

and

with the

prevent
a

also
the

non-judicial

declaratory

financing of

inter

sought,

judgment

case,

defendants

however,

an

of

the

emergency

his

debt

personal
associated

said residence had been "paid in full

in

are

sale

that

discharged as of September 28, 2015."
listed as

alia,

his

original

Kimberly

and

The only persons/entities
complaint's

Matthews,

Kate

styling of the

Harrenstein,

and

Gerlinde Berry.3
On

together

December

with

12,

WFHM

2016,

-

made

Defendants

special

dismiss

Plaintiff's complaint for,

matter

jurisdiction,

failure

to

(Doc.

state

10.)

On

a

December 27,

file an amended complaint.
attached

as

an

exhibit

upon

service

which

2016,

and

appearances

inter alia,

insufficient
claim

Berry

and

lack of

of

to

subject-

process,

and

granted.

Plaintiff moved for

leave to

thereto,

can

moved

-

be

(Doc. 15.)

relief

Harrenstein

In his amended complaint
Plaintiff

forgoes

any

2 Wells Fargo Home Mortgage is a division of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

3 The only persons/entities listed in Plaintiff's complaint under the section
titled "Parties to Action," however, are Plaintiff, AP, and Wells Fargo Bank,
N.A.

(Compare Doc.

1, at 1, with id. H

10-12.)

substantive

mention

of

the

Superior

Court

of

Richmond

County,

its Clerk of Court, Kimberly Matthews, or Gerlinde Berry.4
Doc.

15,

at

solely on

8-15.)

Rather,

Plaintiff

the alleged conduct of WFHM,

focuses

AP,

his

(See

allegations

and Kate Harrenstein

and inartfully attempts to assert a variety of federal and state

law

claims

regards

against

to

a

residence.

these

financing

(Id.)

that

the

debt

been

satisfied

associated

and

history.

himself,

transaction

Plaintiff

an

release the lien on his

credit

aforementioned

also

with

order

related

seeks

that

persons/entities

a

to

personal

declaratory

financing

compelling

his

with

judgment

transaction

WFHM

inter

to,

has

alia,

residence and take action to repair his

(Id.)

Plaintiff,

Kimberly Matthews,

however,

again

Kate Harrenstein,

lists

only

and Gerlinde Berry

in the case caption for his amended complaint.5
Pursuant

to

complaint

must

detailing

the

Federal

contain:
Court's

Rule

(1)

of

a

Civil

short

jurisdiction;

Procedure

and

(2)

statement of the party's "claim showing that
relief;" and

8(a)(2);

(3)

a

plain
short

have a caption which includes,

P.

10(a)

a

statement
and

plain

[he] is entitled to

a demand for the relief sought.

see also Fed. R. Civ.

8(a),

Fed. R. Civ. P.

(requiring complaints to

inter alia,

a case title naming

4 Plaintiff does, however, list Kimberley Matthews, Kate Harrenstein, and
Gerlinde Berry in the case caption for his motion for leave to file an
(Doc. 15, at 1.)
Other than himself, Plaintiff includes
amended complaint.
no other individual/entity in the aforementioned case caption.

(Id.)

5 The only persons/entities listed in Plaintiff's amended complaint under the
section titled "Parties to Action," however, are Plaintiff,
Kate Harrenstein.
(Compare Doc. 15, at 1, with id. at 9-10.)

WFHM,

AP,

and

all

parties

party to

each

to

the

"state

limited

its

as

defendant

upon which it
555

(2007)

"A

claims

far

circumstances").
the

action);

Fed.
or

as

R.

defenses

notice

rests."

P.
in

practicable

The purpose of

fair

Civ.

10(b)

numbered paragraphs,

to

a

of what

Bell Atl.

the

Corp.

claim is

complaint

that

constitutes

prohibited

Sch.

by

Bd.,

order

Procedure

fails

First

Rule

a

^shotgun

8(a) (2)

.

.

."

277

repleading
when

pursuant
a

with

frame a responsive
.

.

(11th Cir.

to

shotgun

Horizon

Pharm.

Corp.,

.

[which
v.

2008)

the
the

in

assessing pro

final

product

district

is]

Volusia

(citations

of

F.3d

lawyers,

court to act

see also Moon v. Newsome,

persons,

access

to

the

to

863

courts.

of
.

.

1275

than

this

leniency

Wagner
Cir.

stringent

used to

does

not

a party or to

261

F.2d 835,

link

(11th

would be

for

Civil

to

employ less

Lampkin-Asam,

regardless

of

fails

1273,

as counsel

276-77;

reasonable

pleadings."

Rule

factual predicates."

se pleadings

deficient

("All

Federal

complaint

464

rewrite

1989)

544,

claims

Lampkin-Asam

And "[w]hile a trial judge is

permit

grounds

550 U.S.

articulate

pleading'
.

261 F. App'x 274,

12(e)

standards

judge

to "give

and the

v. Twombly,

to

adequately a cause of action to its

2006).

is

of

District courts have a "supervisory obligation to sua

omitted).

v.

set

(internal citations and alterations omitted).

pleading

sponte

single

these requirements

sufficient clarity to allow the defendant to

Cty.

(requiring a

F.

837

wealth,

are

. Still,

once

App'x

at

(11th Cir.

entitled
a pro

se

to
.

.

. litigant
rules

is

of

show

2d

a

In

litigants

serve

as

otherwise

subject
the

Ga.

se

legal

this

de

(S.D.

to pro

of a

is

to

facto

2000)

education.

not

counsel
pleading

deficient

for
in

to

not

Yet

does

relevant
Rules

Fed.

a

of

party,

by

those

order

to

F.

should

with

of pro

case

court
or

120

and

even in the
a

Civil

do

enjoyed

give

law and

Judges,

("[C]ourts

litigants

leniency

the

Federal

Unsolicited Letters

1074

lenience

he

including

re

1073,

the benefit
se

court,

court,

Procedure.");
Supp.

in

license
rewrite

to

to
an

sustain

an

action."

initial

and

amended

valid basis

for

federal

(citations omitted)).
From

the

complaints,

current

the

form

Court

of

cannot

Plaintiff's

discern

a

jurisdiction because Plaintiff recites legal terminology without

explaining

how

it

applies

to

his

claims

and

he

has

included

extraneous information with no immediately apparent relevance to

any claims that might be properly before this Court.
Plaintiff's
cannot

were

pleadings

fathom

intended

cogent

how

as

response

understatement

are

an

a

so

individual

defendant,

thereto.

to

lacking

categorize

clarity that
even

alone

Indeed,

it

Plaintiff's

meandering,

and

Plaintiff's

initial

amended

of Rule 8(a).

would

let

ambiguous,

nor

in

Similarly,

convoluted.
complaint

be

know

Court

whether

able

would

to

be

pleadings

As

the

satisfy

frame

a
as

such,
the

they

a

gross
vague,

neither
dictates

The

Court,

however,

recognizes

Plaintiff

is

proceeding pro

se and will therefore give him an opportunity to attempt to cure

his

pleading

Accordingly,

deficiencies

the

Court

by

ORDERS

amending

Plaintiff

to

his

amend

complaint.

his

complaint

to include all of his allegations in one document within twenty-

one days of the date of this Order.6
proceed

with

this

action,

enclosed complaint form.

Plaintiff,

the

Court

he

If Plaintiff wishes to

MUST

complete

and

submit

the

If no response is timely received from

will

presume

that

he

desires

to

have

case voluntarily dismissed and will dismiss this action,

this

without

prejudice, without further notice.7
When preparing his

should

carefully

forthcoming amended complaint,

review

the

instructions

of

the

Plaintiff

enclosed

complaint form and provide the particular information requested.
The

amended complaint must be typed or printed legibly so that

the Court may discern Plaintiff's claims,

and

replace

in

Plaintiff;

no

incorporated

its

entirety

portion

into

his

and it will supersede

the

previous

any

prior

of
amended

pleadings
pleading

shall

by
be

by

reference.

See

811 F.3d 1271, 1277

Hoefling v. City of Miami,

complaint

filed

(11th Cir.

2016);

6 The Court DIRECTS the CLERK to enclose Form Pro Se 1,

Complaint for a Civil

Case, stamped with the appropriate case number, with Plaintiff's service copy
of

this

Order.

7 Because the Court will require Plaintiff to replead his complaint, the Court
DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE the motion to dismiss

Harrenstein,

and

Plaintiff's

motion

WFHM

(doc.

for

leave

response to his motion
judicial notice

(doc.

for

10).
to

filed by Gerlinde Berry,

Similarly,

amend

(doc.

leave to amend

22) .
6

the

15),

(doc.

Court

his

19),

DENIES

motion

to

AS

strike

Kate

MOOT
the

and his motion for

Lowery

v.

2007)
and

Alabama

Power

("an amended

1184,

1219

the

initial

supersedes

factual

basis

simply

not

for

his

state,

specifically

reference

amended

complaint.

amended

complaint

Therefore,
filed

he

in

(by

in

as

a means
example,

documents,"

exhibits
the

Moreover,

complaint

that

exhibit's
Plaintiff

accordance

with

of

Plaintiff

as

the

will

does

not

number)

shall

submit

terms

of

should

Court

Plaintiff
page

the

providing the

in

his

only

one

this

Order.

Plaintiff shall state in the single amended complaint

accordance

wishes

attached

examine

the

For

pleading.

"see

independently

reference

in

Cir.

he shall

them by

pleading

(11th

Plaintiff may attach exhibits to his amended complaint,
incorporate

operative

F.3d

While

not

the

complaint

483

case").

not

becomes

Co.,

the

with

Court

to

the

terms

consider

of

this

as

a

Order

basis

all

for

claims

awarding

that

the

relief sought.

ORDER
September,

ENTERED

at

Augusta,

Georgia,

this

/^0__^ day

2017.

CHIEF
DISTRICT

JUDGE
COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

of