Background

• Yeyille, a lawyer proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s dismissal with prejudice of his third amended complaint and denial of his Rule 60(b) motion.
• The district court warned that previous complaints were shotgun pleadings and instructed conciseness and organization for the third amended complaint.
• The third amended complaint spanned 148 pages, 403 paragraphs, and 30 counts, including various unrelated factual allegations.
• The district court held the third amended complaint to be a shotgun pleading of the second type and dismissed with prejudice.
• Yeyille argued the dismissal violated his Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial and sought relief under Rule 60(b)(6), which the district court denied; the appellate court affirmed.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Weiland v. Palm Beach Cty. Sheriff's Office, 792 F.3d 1313 (11th Cir. 2015) (defines shotgun pleading types and lack of notice)
• Gratton v. Great American Communications, 178 F.3d 1373 (11th Cir. 1999 (per curiam)) (abuse-of-discretion standard for Rule 41(b) dismissal with prejudice)
• Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835 (11th Cir. 1989) (willful contempt and effectiveness of lesser sanctions per se)
• Olivares v. Martin, 555 F.2d 1192 (5th Cir. 1977) (liberal pleading standard does not apply to attorneys)
• Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (pleading standard referenced as governing raising of claims)
• Garvie v. City of Fort Walton Beach, 366 F.3d 1186 (11th Cir. 2004) ( Seventh Amendment considerations when case dismissed pre-trial)
• Smith v. Kitchen, 156 F.3d 1025 (10th Cir. 1997) (no jury trial when no genuine issue to be tried)
• Haase v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 748 F.3d 624 (5th Cir. 2014) (same principle applied to Rule 12(b)(6) dismissals)