Bourjolly v. Werner Automotive Holdings, LLC, 6:25-cv-00015

Guarnata Zeana Bourjolly, proceeding pro se, filed suit against Werner Automotive Holdings, Wells Fargo Bank, and several individuals, alleging violations of the Truth in Lending Act and other claims.
The District Judge previously dismissed claims against defendants Rossi and Boucher for failure to properly serve them.
Defendants moved to dismiss the case and to quash service, claiming insufficiency of service and sought to join other dismissal motions by reference.
The court struck the defendants' notice of joinder for improper incorporation by reference under local rules.
The court found the complaint to be a "shotgun pleading," failing to clearly specify which allegations support which claims against which defendants.
The court dismissed the complaint with leave for the plaintiff to amend and correct deficiencies.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Dismissal for shotgun pleading	Sought relief on five counts	Allegations too vague and generic	Complaint dismissed as an impermissible shotgun
Sufficiency of pleadings (Rule 8/10)	Incorporated by reference	Fails to state claims with specificity	Complaint fails to conform to Rule 8/10
Particularity for fraud (Rule 9(b))	Alleged misrepresentation	Not pled with required particularity	Fraud count dismissed for lack of specificity
Joinder of motions by reference	N/A	Sought to join Wells Fargo's motion	Struck; local rules prohibit incorporation by ref.

Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (articulates the Rule 8 pleading standard; complaint must give fair notice)
Wagner v. First Horizon Pharm. Corp., 464 F.3d 1273 (11th Cir. 2006) (district court may sua sponte order repleader for shotgun pleadings)
Weiland v. Palm Beach Cty. Sheriff's Office, 792 F.3d 1313 (11th Cir. 2015) (defining and categorizing shotgun pleadings)
Silva v. Bieluch, 351 F.3d 1045 (11th Cir. 2003) (pro se plaintiffs generally should get chance to amend poorly drafted complaints)