BRAGG v. ARAMARK FOOD SERVICE et al

Filing 44

OPINION filed. Signed by Judge Anne E. Thompson on 4/27/2016. (eaj)

RECEIVED

APR 2 7 2016
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
BRIAN KEITH BRAGG, et al.,

AT 8:30
M
WILLIAM T. WALSH
CLERK

Civil Action No. 13-4088 (AET-LHG)

Plaintiffs,

v.

OPINION

ARAMARK FOOD SERVICE, et al.,
Defendants.

Thompson, District Judge
1.

On July 2, 2013, Brian Keith Bragg, submitted a civil complaint alleging

violations of his constitutional rights pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and an application to proceed

in forma pauperis. Plaintiff named six additional plaintiffs as parties to this case, but did not
provide in forma pauperis applications for these plaintiffs. (ECF No. 1). These plaintiffs
included: Michael Simpson, Eric G. Ford, Kevin L. Coney, Karim T. Sampson, Henry Kidd, Jr.,
Cruz Martinez, and Damien Free. Later, on August 7, 2013, Plaintiff Damien Free submitted an
application to proceed informa pauperis. (ECF No. 5).
2.

On July 16, 2013, Plaintiff Bragg filed a motion for leave to amend the complaint,

(ECF No. 2), asserting additional and seemingly relevant facts to the original complaint. On July
29, 2013, Plaintiff Bragg filed a motion to proceed as a class action, (ECF No. 4), and on August
14, 2013, Bragg filed two motions: one to amend and one to appoint class counsel (ECF Nos. 6,
7). The motion to amend sought to add numerous defendants alleged by Bragg to have
knowledge of the claims at issue. (ECF No. 6).
3.

On August 19, 2013, Plaintiff Bragg signed a stipulation of dismissal against all

county defendants. (ECF No. 8). Mail sent to Plaintiff Bragg was returned as undeliverable on

August 23 and October 30, 2013. (ECF Nos. 9, 14). Mail sent to additional plaintiffs, including
Mr. Free, Karim Sampson, Cruz Martinez, Eric G. Ford, was also returned to the Court as
undeliverable. (ECF Nos. 11, 12, 13, 15).
4.

On October 16, 2013, additional Plaintiff Michael Simpson filed a motion to

proceed as class representative. (ECF No. 10). Plaintiff Simpson stated that Plaintiff Bragg was
no longer involved in the case due to his signing the stipulation of dismissal. He also stated in the
motion that "the plaintiffs who submitted their names as a class have a high likelihood of success
on the merits." (ECF No. 10). With the motion, Plaintiff Simpson provided his informa pauperis
application.
5.

By Order dated March 25, 2014, this Court deemed Plaintiffs Free, Sampson,

Martinez, and Ford to be withdrawn from the case pursuant to Local Civil Rule 10.l(a) for failure
to keep this Court apprised of their addresses. (ECF No. 18 -,r 5).
6.

That same Order denied Plaintiff Simpson's motion to proceed as a class

representative for the two other remaining plaintiffs, Coney and Kidd, as being premature.
(Docket Entry 18 ,, 6-8).
7.

The Court also denied Plaintiff Bragg's motions to amend the complaint and

directed Plaintiff Simpson to file a complete Amended Complaint within 60 days of the Court's
order, or the complaint would be deemed to have been withdrawn. {ECF No. 18, 8).
8.

Plaintiff Simpson did not file an amended complaint within the time period set

forth by the Court, therefore on October 30, 2014, the Court dismissed the case. (ECF No. 19).
9.

On December 1, 2014, Plaintiff Coney filed a motion to amend the complaint

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) and to add plaintiffs to the case. (ECF No. 20).
His motion did not include the names of the plaintiffs he wanted to add to the case.

2

10.

On December 8, 2014, Plaintiff Bragg filed a motion to amend the complaint

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) and to add plaintiffs Qayshawn McNeil,
Andrew Wilkins, Louis Rivera, Clement Bafura, Tyrell Williams, James Turner, and Shaquan
Tucker to the case. (ECF No. 21).
11.

The Court received applications to proceed in forma pauperis from Plaintiffs

Wilkins, Rivera, Bafura, Williams, Turner, and Bragg. (ECF No. 22).
12.

On August 31, 2015, the Court ordered the Clerk ofthe Court to add Rivera and

Bafura as Plaintiffs, and granted their applications to proceed informa pauperis. (ECF No. 24).
13.

The Court entered a separate Order on that same date denying both motions to

amend the complaint and administratively terminated the complaint. (ECF No. 25).
14.

Plaintiff Bragg filed a change of address and motion for the appointment of

counsel on October 5, 2015. (ECF Nos. 33 and 34).
15.

On November 12, 2015, the Court received a letter from Plaintiff Bragg inquiring

as to why this complaint was dismissed. (Docket Entry 37).
16.

The Court responded to Plaintiff Bragg on November 24, 2015, and gave

Plaintiffs one final chance to file an amended complaint. (ECF No. 40).
17.

Plaintiff Bragg submitted a proposed amended complaint on December 7, 2015,

(ECF No. 41 ), stating he wished to reinstate his original complaint and proceed as the sole
plaintiff in this action.
18.

Plaintiff Bragg may not unilaterally dismiss other Plaintiffs from the case.

Moreover, the proposed amended complaint seeks to reinstate claims and defendants that he
agreed to dismiss with prejudice on August 19, 2013. (ECF No. 8).

3

19.

As the proposed amended complaint would not survive a motion to dismiss,

the motion to amend is denied. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 15; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).
20.

It has also come to this Court's attention in other matters instituted by

Plaintiff Bragg that he was released from the Mercer County Correctional Center in January
2016. See Letter from Mercer County Counsel, Bragg v. Ellis, No. 15-7638 (D.N.J. Jan. 21,
2016) ECFNo. 23.
21.

No new address has been provided for Plaintiff Bragg in violation of Local

Civil Rule 10.l(a). Plaintiff Bragg has been advised on several occasions by this Court that
he must keep a current address.
22.

The complaint will be dismissed due to repeated violations of the court rules

and failure of the Plaintiffs to prosecute their case. As the Court has given Plaintiffs several
opportunities to submit a complaint, the dismissal is with prejudice.
23.

An appropriate Order follows.

~ft?-~~~

Date ,

U.S. District Judge

4