Reis v. Bank of America, N.A. et al

Middle District of Florida, flmd-8:2017-cv-01833

ORDER granting {{36}} Motion to Dismiss without prejudice. Signed by Judge James D. Whittemore on 8/23/2018. (AKA)

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

. 1. . . . PagelD 481. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION. . . . . . . . SHARON REIS, . . . . Plaintiff, . . . . . . Case No: 8: 17 - cv - 1833 - JDW - TGW. . . . ' . BANK OF AMERICA, N. A. and PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, LLC, . . . . . . . . . Defendants. . ' . 1: . . . . . . . . . . . . . ORDER. . . . . . . BEFORE THE COURT are Defendant PennyMac Loan Services, LLC's Motion to Dismiss. . . . . . Amended Complaint (Dkt. 36), and Plaintiffs ' response (Dkt. 41) . Upon consideration, Penny Mac's. . . . . . . . . . . N Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 36) is GRANTED on the grounds that Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. . . . . . . . (Dkt. 31) is a shotgun complaint and will be dismissed. . . . ' . . A complaint should contain a " short and plain statement of the claim showing that the. . . . . pleader is entitled to relief. " Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 (a) (2) . This Rule does not require detailed factual. . . . . . . allegations, but a plaintiff's complaint must contain more than unadorned or conclusory accusations. . . . . . of harm. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556U.S. 662, 678 (2009) . The complaint must " plead all facts. . . . . ' . . . . . establishing an entitlement to relief with more than " labels and conclusions ' or a ' formulaic. . . . . recitation of the elements of a cause of action. " " Resnick v. Av Med, Inc ., 693 F. 3d 1317, 1324 (11th. . . . Cir. 2012) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550U.S. 554, 555 (2007)) . " A claim has facial. . . . plausibility when the plaintiff pleaded factual content allows the court to draw the reasonable a. . . . . ' . . . . . . . . . . . ! ! . . . . Pageld 482. . . . . " . . . . . . . . . inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged. " Iqbal, 556U.S. at 678 (citing. . . . Twombly, 550U.S. at 556) . . . . . . ' . Each count of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Dkt. 31) purports to incorporate all sixty - one. . . . . (61) paragraphs of general and factual allegations. " Consequently, allegations of fact that may be. . . . material to a determination of count one, but not count four, are nonetheless made a part of count. . . . four. . . . [ I ] t is virtually impossible to know which allegations of fact are intended to support which. ' . . . . . claim (s) for relief. " " Paylor v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co ., 748 F. 3d 1117, 1125 - 26 (11th Cir. 2014) . . . ' . . (quoting Anderson v. Dist. Bd. of Trs. of Cent. Florida Cmty. Coll ., 77 F. 3d 364, 366 (11th. . . . . Cir. 1996)) . Indeed, some allegations are inconsistent with certain claims, but are nevertheless. ' . . . . . incorporated into those claims. ? The Eleventh Circuit has recognized the impropriety of shotgun. . . " . . . ' . ' pleadings for years. See id .; Jackson v. Bank of America, N. A ., - - - F. 3d - - - -, 2018 WL 3673002, at 7. . ' . ' . . . * 3 (11th Cir. August 3, 2018); Weiland v. Palm Beach Cnty. Sheriff's Office, 792 F. 3d 1313, 1321 " . . . ' . 1 ' 22 (11th Cir. 2015) . The proper remedy for a shotgun complaint is to strike the complaint and order ' . . ' . ' . TTT a repleader. Weiland, 792 F. 3d at 1321 n. 10 (citing Wagner v. First Horizon Pharm. Corp ., 464 F. 3d. I I. 1273, 1280 (11th Cir. 2006)) . . ' . . . " . . . ' . . ! Accordingly, the Amended Complaint (Dkt. 31) is DISMISSED without prejudice. ! . . . . . . . . . . . ' . ' . . ' . - Although Plaintiff's Amended Complaint does not adopt the allegations of all preceding counts, the incorporation of each and every factual allegation in all three counts has been characterized by the Eleventh Circuit as a shotgun complaint. See Jackson v. Bank of America, N. A ., - - - F. 3d - - - -, 2018 WL 3673002, at * 3 (11th Cir. August 3, 2018) ("The amended complaint was. . . a shotgun pleading: it incorporated all of the factual allegations into each count without delineating which allegations pertained to each count .") . . ' . . . . . " . . . ' . ' . . For example, it is not apparent how the allegation that " Defendants are considered a ' person ' within the meaning of the FCCPA. . . " (Dkt. 31, 1 17) is relevant to Plaintiff's Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA") claim brought under Count II. . . . . . ' . . . . . . . . . . Pageld 483 Plaintiff shall file a Second Amended Complaint within fourteen (14) days of this Order. " Failure to do so will result in dismissal of this action without further notice. DONE AND ORDERED this 23 day of August, 2018. this 2324 JAMES D. WHITTEMORE United States District Judge Copies to: Counsel of Record Additionally, to the extent Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Penny Mac's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 41) attempts to clarify which factual allegations go to which claim, the Amended Complaint still is shotgun complaint.