Smiley v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC

Middle District of Florida, flmd-8:2016-cv-01065

ORDER ATTACHED denying as moot {{9}} Motion to Dismiss, directing Plaintiff to replead the complaint within fifteen (15) days, and directing Defendant to file its response within fifteen (15) days of service. Signed by Judge Richard A. Lazzara on 5/19/2016. (CCB)

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

PageID 184 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION NATHANIEL SMILEY, Plaintiff, v. CASE NO. 8:16-cv-1065-T-26AEP NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC d/b/a Champion Mortgage Co., Defendant. / ORDER Defendant has filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint, thereby prompting this Court to examine its allegations. In the Court's view, the Plaintiff's complaint is the quintessential shotgun pleading that has been condemned on numerous occasions by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. See Davis v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated, 516 F.3d 955, 979 n.54 (11th Cir. 2008) (collecting cases).1 As in Strategic Income Fund, L.L.C. v. Spear, Leeds & Kellogg Corporation, 305 F.3d 1293, 1295 (11th Cir. 2002), the 1 The Davis Court, speaking through Judge Tjoflat, also engaged in a thorough and extensive discussion of the havoc that such pleadings wreak on the judicial system, litigants, and the public at large. 516 F.3d at 979-84; see also Weiland v. Palm Beach Cnty. Sheriff's Office, 792 F.3d F.3d 1313, 1321-22 (11th Cir. July 2015) (recounting the Eleventh Circuit's history dealing with shotgun pleadings on appeal and grouping such pleadings into four categories). PageID 185 complaint "contains several counts, each one incorporating by reference the allegations of its predecessors, leading to a situation where most of the counts (i.e., all but the first) contain irrelevant factual allegations and legal conclusions." Under these circumstances, the Court has the inherent authority, even if not requested by opposing counsel, to demand a repleader sua sponte. See Lumley v. City of Dade City, Fla., 327 F.3d 1186, 1192 n.13 (11th Cir. 2003) (suggesting that when faced with a shotgun pleading a district court, acting on its own initiative, should require a repleader); Magluta v. Samples, 256 F.3d 1282, 1284 n.3 (11th Cir. 2001) (noting that district courts confronted by shotgun complaints have the inherent authority to demand repleader sua sponte). ACCORDINGLY, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1) Plaintiff shall replead the complaint within fifteen (15) days of this order. 2) Defendant shall file its response within fifteen (15) days of service. 3) The Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 9) is denied as moot. DONE AND ORDERED at Tampa, Florida, on May 19, 2016. s/Richard A. Lazzara RICHARD A. LAZZARA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE COPIES FURNISHED TO: Counsel of Record -2-