Duval v. Trans Union Inc.
8:25-cv-00139
M.D. Fla.Jun 2, 2025Background
- Vincent A. Duval Jr., acting pro se, filed suit against Trans Union in the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division, and sought in forma pauperis (IFP) status.
- Duval’s original complaint was found by the court to violate Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8 and 10, lacking sufficient clarity and legal basis.
- The court ordered Duval to submit an amended complaint that complied with federal procedural requirements and pleaded a valid cause of action by May 26, 2025.
- Duval was warned that failing to file a proper amended complaint could result in dismissal of his case.
- Duval did not file an amended complaint by the court’s deadline, prompting judicial review for dismissal and denial of IFP status.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Compliance with pleading rules (FRCP) | Sought to proceed | Not specified | Duval failed to comply with rules—complaint insufficient. |
| Requirement to amend deficient complaint | Not addressed | Not specified | Duval did not file amended complaint as ordered. |
| Eligibility for in forma pauperis status | Seeks indigency waiver | Not specified | IFP motion denied due to failure to prosecute. |
| Dismissal for procedural noncompliance | No response | Not specified | Complaint dismissed without prejudice. |
Key Cases Cited
- McNeil v. United States, 508 U.S. 106 (1993) (procedural rules apply equally to pro se litigants; no exception due to lack of counsel)
- Washington v. Dep't of Child. & Fams., 256 F. App’x 326 (11th Cir. 2007) (pro se plaintiffs must adhere to pleading requirements and procedural rules)
- Martinez v. Kristi Cleaners, Inc., 364 F.3d 1305 (11th Cir. 2004) (court must review pro se complaints for sufficiency under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e))
- Mitchell v. Farcass, 112 F.3d 1483 (11th Cir. 1997) (court may dismiss IFP actions that fail to state a claim)