Coit v. Zavaras
1:10-cv-01555
D. Colo.Nov 23, 2010Background
- Plaintiff Jill Coit, proceeding pro se, filed a 294-page Prisoner Complaint seeking injunctive relief.
- The court granted leave to proceed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 without an initial partial filing fee.
- The court liberally construes pro se filings but requires compliance with Rule 8 and local rules for clarity.
- The court found the complaint verbose, disjointed, and barely legible, failing to provide a concise statement of claims and involved defendants.
- The court directed Coit to amend the complaint to state specific claims, show personal participation, and legibility standards, or face dismissal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the complaint comply with Rule 8 pleading requirements? | Coit asserts her extensive allegations state her claims for relief. | Court should require a concise, readable pleading with specific claims and participants. | No; amended complaint required to satisfy Rule 8 and readability. |
| Must Coit plead personal participation by each defendant? | Coit names numerous defendants as responsible parties. | Plaintiff must show how each defendant personally participated in the alleged violations. | Yes; amended complaint must allege specific personal participation. |
| Is dismissal warranted for failure to meet Rule 8 standards? | Claims should be considered despite format. | Noncompliant pleadings may be dismissed at court's discretion. | Dismissal remains a possibility unless amended pleadings cure deficiencies. |
| Should the court deny or defer ruling on plaintiff's related motions? | Coit seeks relief via motions regarding document handling. | Motions are inadequately presented and fail to meet requirements. | Motions denied without prejudice or denied for purposes stated. |
| What are the procedural requirements for filing the amended complaint? | Amendment should cure deficiencies. | Amendment must be properly drafted, double-spaced, legible, and properly formatted. | Coit must file an Amended Prisoner Complaint within 30 days, properly formatted and legible. |
Key Cases Cited
- Monument Builders of Greater Kansas City, Inc. v. American Cemetery Ass'n of Kansas, 891 F.2d 1473 (10th Cir. 1989) (Rule 8 pleading aims for conciseness and clarity)
- TV Communications Network, Inc. v. ESPN, Inc., 767 F. Supp. 1062 (D. Colo. 1991) (Rule 8(a) purposes and pleading requirements)
- New Home Appliance Ctr., Inc. v. Thompson, 250 F.2d 881 (10th Cir. 1957) (sufficiency of complaint; sufficient facts to support relief)
- Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106 (10th Cir. 1991) (liberal construction of pro se pleadings; limits)
- Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (Supreme Court 1972) (pro se complaints treated with leniency)
- Bennett v. Passic, 545 F.2d 1260 (10th Cir. 1976) (personal participation requirement in § 1983 actions)
- Kentucky v. Graham, 473 U.S. 159 (1985) (personal participation standard for supervisory liability)