Figueroa v. Jesus arena
1:17-cv-22024
S.D. Fla.Jul 31, 2017Background
- Plaintiff Negron Eduardo Figueroa, pro se, filed a civil action in the Southern District of Florida and moved for appointment of counsel.
- Plaintiff invoked Florida criminal rule 3.111(b)(2) but also referenced 28 U.S.C. § 1915 in his second Amended Complaint; the court treated the filing as a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP).
- The second Amended Complaint was handwritten and alleged various disconnected facts (references to rape of his ex-wife and her son, a police officer, celebrities, and removal/storage of semen and blood) but failed to identify clearly the defendant(s) or causes of action.
- The pleading did not meet Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) minimal pleading requirements and made it impossible to link facts to particular claims or defendants.
- The court applied the § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) standard (failure to state a claim) and the Rule 12(b)(6)/Twombly/Iqbal pleading principles while recognizing the relaxed standard for pro se litigants but refusing to rewrite the complaint.
- The court denied appointment of counsel without prejudice, dismissed the second Amended Complaint without prejudice, and gave Plaintiff until August 14, 2017 to file a Third Amended Complaint with specific formatting and content requirements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether appointment of counsel is warranted | Negron sought appointment under Florida Rule 3.111(b)(2) (and referenced § 1915) | No supporting showing of need or that counsel is required in this IFP civil matter | Denied without prejudice; state criminal rule inapplicable to federal civil proceedings |
| Whether complaint states a claim under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) / Rule 12(b)(6) | Complaint alleges severe wrongdoing and seeks damages (ten billion dollars) | Complaint is vague, disorganized, and fails to plead elements or link facts to claims | Dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim |
| Whether defendant(s) are adequately identified / notice pleading satisfied | Plaintiff named Jesus Arena but facts do not link alleged misconduct to any named defendant | Complaint fails to identify who committed alleged acts or how defendants are liable | Complaint fails to put defendant on notice; dismissal ordered |
| Whether leave to amend should be granted and what form it must take | Plaintiff implicitly sought relief and further litigation | Court required a properly pleaded Third Amended Complaint meeting Rule 8 and Rule 10(b) standards | Court granted leave to amend by a deadline and specified pleading content and formatting requirements |
Key Cases Cited
- Mitchell v. Farcass, 112 F.3d 1483 (11th Cir. 1997) (§ 1915(e) dismissal standard for failure to state claim is same as Rule 12(b)(6))
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (complaint must allege enough facts to raise a right to relief above the speculative level)
- GJR Invs., Inc. v. Cnty. of Escambia, Fla., 132 F.3d 1359 (11th Cir. 1998) (court may not rewrite a deficient pro se pleading)
- Tannenbaum v. United States, 148 F.3d 1262 (11th Cir. 1998) (pro se complaints are afforded a more liberal standard but must meet minimal pleading requirements)
- Anderson v. Dist. Bd. of Trustees of Cent. Fla. Cmty. Coll., 77 F.3d 364 (11th Cir. 1996) (complaint must give fair notice so it is possible to know which facts support which claims)