Crossland v. Skeen et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED, without prejudice, for plaintiff's failure to comply with this Court's Order of December 20, 2012. A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order.. Signed by District Judge Jean C. Hamilton on 1/11/13. (CEL)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
MELVIN SKEEN, et al.,
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon review of plaintiff's amended complaint
Plaintiff originally filed his action with another inmate, Keith E. Brown-El. See
Brown-El v. Skeen, 4:12-CV-1680-FRB (E.D. Mo.). The Court struck plaintiff
Crossland from that action, explaining that prisoners proceeding in forma pauperis may
not join together under Rule 20 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and ordered
the Clerk of Court to open a separate case for him, which is the instant action. On
December 20, 2012, after the instant case was opened, plaintiff was ordered to file an
amended complaint that complied with the Court's Memorandum and Order [Doc. #5].
Specifically, the court set forth detailed instructions as to what the amended complaint
and the "Statement of Claim" should contain. The Court further ordered that if plaintiff
failed to comply, this action would be dismissed without prejudice and without further
notice to him.
Plaintiff has failed to comply with this Court's Order of December 20. Plaintiff,
again, is attempting to join with other inmates in bringing this action. On page 5(A) of
the amended complaint [Doc. #6, page 6 of 18], plaintiff states, "As noted there are
three (3) named plaintiffs, however - inclusive here/w are two (2) other claims . . .
which plaintiffs seek class certification status for." Moreover, in the "Statement of
Claim," plaintiff was instructed to start by typing the first defendant’s name, and under
that name, he was to set forth in separate numbered paragraphs the allegations
supporting his claim(s) as to that particular defendant, as well as the right(s) that he
claims that particular defendant violated. Plaintiff was instructed to proceed in this
manner with each of the named defendants, separately setting forth each individual
name and under that name, in numbered paragraphs, the allegations specific to that
particular defendant and the right(s) that he claims that particular defendant violated.
Rather than comply with the Court's instructions, plaintiff has merely photocopied
pages from the "Statement of Facts" in Brown-El v. Skeen, 4:12-CV-1680-FRB (E.D.
Mo.), and included them as his "Statement of Facts" in the instant action. This does not
comply with the Court's Order of December 20. The paragraphs are not sequentially
numbered, and they are not structured in accordance with the Court's specific
instructions. As such, this action will be dismissed.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED, without
prejudice, for plaintiff's failure to comply with this Court's Order of December 20,
2012. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
A separate Order of Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order.
Dated this 11th day of January, 2013.
/s/Jean C. Hamilton
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?