Halford, Ernest v. Raemisch, Rick et al

Filing 14

ORDER dismissing amended complaint without prejudice for plaintiff's failure to comply with Rule 8. Amended complaint due by 11/1/10. Signed by District Judge William M. Conley on 10/1/10. (elc),(ps)

H a l f o r d , Ernest v. Raemisch, Rick et al

D o c . 14

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

ERNEST LOUIS HALFORD #365751 Plaintiff, v. 10-cv-206-slc1 RICK RAEMISCH: D.O.C., GOV. JAMES DOYLE and Current HFS - Dir., Defendant. Plaintiff Ernest Louis Halford, a prisoner at the Waupun Correctional Institution in W aupun, Wisconsin, had submitted a proposed complaint, dkt. #1, and several supplem ents, dkts. ##3, 7 and 9. On May 20, 2010, his complaint was dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 and he was given until June 9, 2010 to file an amended complaint that complied with the rule. Halford submitted a pleading on Ju ne 11, 2010, that appears to be his amended complaint. Unfortunately, this complaint does not comply with Rule 8 either. Because of his status as a pro se litigant, Halford will be provided one, last opportunity to file an amended complaint that addresses each deficiency explained below. Failing that, plaintiff's lawsuit will be dismissed. As the court previously explained, Fed. R. Civ. P. 8. requires that a complaint set forth a (1) short and plain statement of the grounds for the court's jurisdiction; (2) a short and p lain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and (3) a demand fo r the relief sought. Pursuant to Rule 8(d), "each allegation must be simple, concise, and OPINION AND ORDER

1

For the purpose of issuing this order, Judge William M. Conley acts for the court.

Dockets.Justia.com

d irect." Halford was advised that he should draft his filings on blank or lined paper, leaving space in between lines and words to permit it to be read more easily. While Halford attem pts to comply with this directive by leaving space between the lines and words, he did n o t use the complaint form that was sent to him and he continues to use painstaking and unique calligraphy that is difficult to read. In addition, most of what is written is in the fo rm of phrases, free verse and even a kind of poetry, rather than coherent sentences and nu m bered paragraphs that are essential for meaningful communication between legal parties an d the court. M ore troubling still is the continued, total lack of clarity with which he sets out his claim s. There are no captions or specific claims in his amended complaint and he does not allege who the defendants are or what they personally did to harm him, beyond having the m ost senior members of state government, who are almost certainly not legally responsible fo r any specific misconduct done to plaintiff. In addition the claims appear to be different on es than he was attempting to state in his first complaint. S o m e of Halford's allegations describe fantastic or delusional scenarios. The following are quotes from his complaint. To much, using thier (code) word's, . . . while he's, in the vicin ity , which allegedly is how he heard "Mandela the Motor M ou th" . .? .did not know about all, the extra's, that a unnam ed: R.N. was (injecting into oranges...H.I.V. was allegedly heard by: confidential informant #3, who knew the: SOFT D IET tray was for, the "old nigga" that filed the native religious suit for Geronimo-T) L ocal Hero/Pride is, one way to manipulate M.J. to inad vertently confess, via 1:CO-worker/Prison Guard-rookie 2

(R EP U B L IC AN ). W ho is willing to re-locate/Undercover: Opera Agent, who voted for Pres. Reagan twice and does not, blame, his (allegedly) N o rth American Free Trade Agreement (N.A.F.T.A.) for the 46 m illion factory/manu. jobs,-lost to low wager's. W hatever value there is in this prose as a purely artistic matter, none of these statements suggest that anyone violated any of Halford's constitutional rights. In his submission, however, there are hints at a few, clearer allegations. Referring to him self by his inmate number, 365751, Halford says that on February 6, 2007, he was vind ictively transferred to the Waupun Correctional Institution from the Columbia C o rrectio nal Institution's segregation unit, but he does not allege in any legally intelligible w ay what, much less who was responsible for this transfer. It is also possible that Halford is attem p tin g to state a claim concerning medical treatment, but he has not alleged what or w ho is responsible for any inadequate treatment he may have received. B eca use plaintiff's amended complaint does not comply with Rule 8, the court will d ism iss it without prejudice. Plaintiff Halford will be afforded one, last opportunity to subm it an amended complaint that complies with Rule 8. Attached to this opinion is a blank complaint form for plaintiff to fill out. In filling out the form, plaintiff should explain h is claims in full sentences, numbered paragraphs and a way that would enable someone readin g the complaint to answer the following questions: · What are the facts that form the basis for plaintiff's claims? · What did individual defendants do that makes them personally responsible for violating plaintiff's rights? 3

· How was plaintiff individually injured by defendant's conduct? P la in tiff will have until November 1, 2010, to file an amended complaint that com plies with Rule 8 and this Opinion and Order. If plaintiff does this, the court will take the amended complaint under advisement for screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). If he fails to respond to this order to this order by November 1, however, the case will rem ain closed.

ORDER IT IS ORDERED that: (1) plaintiff's amended complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice for his failure to comply with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8; (2) he may have until November 1 , 2010, in which to file an amended complaint that complies with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8.; and (3) if plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint by that date, the clerk's office is directed to close this case. E n tered this 1s t day of October, 2010. B Y THE COURT: /s/ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ W IL L IA M M. CONLEY D istrict Judge

4