Clayton v. Brennan et al
Filing
40
AMENDED MEMORANDUM AND ORDER :IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint (Doc. 34 ), is DENIED IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Permissive Joinder (Doc. 38 ), i s DENIED. IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Plaintiff SHALL FILE, no more than fifteen (15) days from the date of this order, a short, concise complaint, that: 1. Identifies each specific legal claim she is asserting; 2. Identifies the party or parties ag ainst whom each specific legal claim is asserted; and 3. Lists under each specific legal claim only those facts which are necessary to that claim. Plaintiff's complaint SHALL BE LIMITED to the current named Defendants: A. Megan J. Brennan, Post master General, United States Postal Service; and B. American Postal Worker Union AFL-CIO. If Plaintiff fails to comply with the Court's instructions regarding her new amended complaint, it will dismiss her suit without prejudice. Response to Court due by 10/23/2019.. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 10/8/19. (KKS)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
ROSALIND A. CLAYTON,
Plaintiff,
vs.
MEGAN J. BRENNAN, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No. 4:18-cv-01039-JAR
AMENDED MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Third Amended
Complaint (Doc. 34), and Motion for Leave to File Permissive Joinder (Doc. 38).
Plaintiff filed suit on June 25, 2018, submitting a nineteen-page complaint with 74
paragraphs of factual allegations. (Doc. 1.) Two days later, Plaintiff sought leave to file an
amended complaint. (Doc. 5.) That motion was granted (Doc. 9), and Plaintiff filed an amended
complaint stretching twenty-three pages with 79 paragraphs of factual support (Doc. 10). On
January 24, 2019, Plaintiff moved for leave to supplement her complaint. (Doc. 17.) The Court
ordered her to file a motion for leave to file a second amended complaint with the proposed second
amended complaint attached. (Doc. 21.) Plaintiff filed her motion for leave to file a second
amended complaint on April 8, 2019. (Doc. 31.) It was forty-seven pages long and asserted 142
paragraphs of factual allegations. (Id.) On April 12, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion
but directed her to file a new proposed second amended complaint “that sets out each separate
legal claim she intends to raise, with a concise statement of supporting facts relevant to that claim.”
(Doc. 33 at 1.)
The apparent product of that Order is this Motion for Leave to File Third Amended
Complaint. (Doc. 34.) Her proposed third amended complaint has been trimmed to thirty-one
pages and 141 paragraphs of facts. (Doc. 34-1.) It does not clearly or concisely set out separate
legal claims nor does it organize the factual allegations under the claim each fact supports. For
this reason, the Court will deny the motion and direct her one final time to file a new second
amended aomplaint that complies with the Court’s April 8 Order:
She is directed to attach a new proposed amended complaint that sets out each
separate legal claim she intends to raise, with a concise statement of supporting
facts relevant to that claim. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2) (directing Plaintiffs to submit
"a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to
relief'). Plaintiff is cautioned that the filing of this amended complaint completely
replaces the original and amended complaints and that claims that are not realleged are deemed abandoned. See e.g., In re Wireless Telephone Federal Cost
Recovery Fees Litigation, 396 F.3d 922, 928 (8th Cir. 2005).
((Doc. 33 at 1-2.)
The Court will deny Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Permissive Joinder. (Doc. 38.)
The scope of a civil action and the determination of joinder is “a matter for the discretion of the
district court.” Mosley v. Gen. Motors Corp., 497 F.2d 1330, 1332 (8th Cir. 1974). Here, Plaintiff
seeks to add a new party and new claims sixteen months after she first filed suit and despite having
filed no fewer than four versions of her complaint in this case. To permit the joinder—which, by
definition, is not necessary to the prosecution of her claims—would be unduly prejudicial to the
proposed new defendants and would only serve to further delay this case.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Third Amended
Complaint (Doc. 34), is DENIED
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Permissive Joinder
(Doc. 38), is DENIED.
IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Plaintiff SHALL FILE, no more than fifteen (15)
days from the date of this order, a short, concise complaint, that:
1. Identifies each specific legal claim she is asserting;
2. Identifies the party or parties against whom each specific legal claim is
asserted; and
3. Lists under each specific legal claim only those facts which are necessary
to that claim.
Plaintiff’s complaint SHALL BE LIMITED to the current named Defendants:
A. Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service; and
B. American Postal Worker Union AFL-CIO.
If Plaintiff fails to comply with the Court’s instructions regarding her new amended complaint, it
will dismiss her suit without prejudice.
Dated this 8th day of October, 2019.
________________________________
JOHN A. ROSS
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?