Roberts v. Perry et al
Filing
29
ORDER denying 26 Motion for Joinder. Signed by Chief Judge Frank D. Whitney on 1/27/2017. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(kby)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
1:16-cv-34-FDW
JIMMY ALLEN ROBERTS,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
FRANK L. PERRY, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________________)
ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s “Motion for Joinder,” in which
Plaintiff has filed a 186-page document, and he asks for this Court to “conjoin, or otherwise
incorporate the issues asserted in the three pleadings attached hereto (respectively) into Claim 3,
of the civil rights complaint now pending before this Court.” (Doc. No. 7). Plaintiff’s motion
will be denied. First, he has not attached a proposed Amended Complaint. A plaintiff may not
amend his Complaint in piecemeal fashion. Furthermore, and more importantly, most of the
documents and “claims” that Plaintiff purports to incorporate by filing his 186-page document
are not related to his current, pending claim of First Amendment religious discrimination in this
Court.1 Finally, Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires a “short and plain
statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Petitioner’s proposed 186page document does not comply with Rule 8(a)(2) because it does not contain a “short and plain
statement” of his claims. Thus, Plaintiff’s “motion for joinder” is denied.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1
The Court further notes that this action has proceeded well past the initial stages, as a
scheduling order has been entered, with the deadline for discovery set at February 14, 2017, and
dispositive motions are due by March 14, 2017.
1
(1) Plaintiff’s Motion for Joinder, (Doc. No. 26), is DENIED.
Signed: January 27, 2017
2
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?