Basham v. Midland Funding, LLC et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants' motion to dismiss [#10] is denied in part and denied as moot in part as stated above. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's request for 30 days to file an amended complaint in compliance with the Memorandum and Order or seek dismissal of her federal claims. Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on February 26, 2015. (MCB)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
MIDLAND FUNDING, LLC, et al.,
Case No. 4:15 CV 30 CDP
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Defendants removed this case on the basis of federal question jurisdiction
and now move to dismiss it on the ground that plaintiff’s pro se state court petition
does not comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8, which requires a short and plain statement
of plaintiff’s claims. As plaintiff was not required to comply with the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure when she filed her petition in state court, I can hardly
dismiss her case on this basis. However, plaintiff’s petition is confusing and seems
to contain allegations not directed at the named defendants. In addition, plaintiff
pleads state law claims for fraud, which are required to be pled with particularity
whether federal or state rules apply. The Court’s own review of the petition also
reveals that some of plaintiff’s federal claims may be barred by the applicable
statutes of limitations governing these claims. In addition, the Court has real
concerns about the viability of plaintiff’s claims for damages to her reputation
given her current status before me on probation for tax fraud. United States v.
Basham, 4:10CR118 CDP. For all these reasons, the Court will grant plaintiff’s
alternative request for 30 days to file an amended complaint in an attempt to cure
the deficiencies in her pleading. Of course, should plaintiff choose to dismiss her
federal claims, the Court could – and in this case, would – exercise its discretion to
remand the remaining state law claims back to state court for resolution without
deciding the sufficiency of the pleadings or the merits of plaintiff’s cause.1
However, if plaintiff intends to remain in federal court and represent herself, then
she must comply with all local and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. As is
relevant here, that means she must file a comprehensible, amended complaint
which plainly states claims against the named defendants with sufficient detail and
supported by facts as is required by law.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendants’ motion to dismiss [#10] is
denied in part and denied as moot in part as stated above.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s request for 30 days to file an
amended complaint [#12-2] is granted, and plaintiff shall have 30 days from the
date of this Memorandum and Order to either file an amended complaint in
Any dismissal of federal claims would be treated as a motion for dismissal if Court approval is
required at that time.
compliance with this Memorandum and Order or seek dismissal of her federal
CATHERINE D. PERRY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 26th day of February, 2015.
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?