From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Houston v. Lynch

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION
Aug 12, 2015
No. 4:15CV1217 ERW (E.D. Mo. Aug. 12, 2015)

Opinion

No. 4:15CV1217 ERW

08-12-2015

ERIC HOUSTON, Plaintiff, v. LORETTA LYNCH, et al., Defendants


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court upon review of plaintiff's pro se complaint. The complaint is defective because it has not been drafted on the Court's form. See E.D. Mo. Local Rule 2.06(A). Additionally, plaintiff must either pay the filing fee or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a).

Because plaintiff is proceeding pro se, the Court will allow plaintiff to file an amended complaint on the Court's form. Plaintiff has thirty days from the date of this Order to file an amended complaint in accordance with the specific instructions set forth here. All claims in the action must be included in one, centralized complaint form. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(a)(1), 8(a).

Additionally, plaintiff is warned that the filing of an amended complaint replaces the original complaint and all previously-filed pleadings, so plaintiff must include each and every one of the claims he wishes to pursue in the amended complaint. See, e.g., In re Wireless Telephone Federal Cost Recovery Fees Litigation, 396 F.3d 922, 928 (8th Cir. 2005). Any claims from the original complaint, supplements, and pleadings that are not included in the amended complaint will be deemed abandoned and will not be considered. Id. If plaintiff wishes to sue defendants in their individual capacities, plaintiff must specifically say so in the amended complaint.

Furthermore, the complaint is nonsensical and indecipherable. Plaintiff must present his claims in a coherent fashion or they will be dismissed as frivolous.

All of plaintiff's claims should be clearly set forth in the "Statement of Claim." The complaint must be signed. If plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint on the Court's form within thirty days and in compliance with the Court's instructions, the Court will dismiss this action without prejudice and without further notice.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED the Clerk is directed to mail to plaintiff a copy of the Court's prisoner civil rights complaint form.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Clerk is directed to mail to plaintiff a copy of the motion to proceed in forma pauperis form for prisoners.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED plaintiff must file an amended complaint on the Court's form within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. Plaintiff is advised that his amended complaint will take the place of his original complaint and will be the only pleading that this Court will review. So, the amended complaint must include all of plaintiff's claims.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED plaintiff must either pay the $400 filing fee or submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED if plaintiff files a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, he must also file a certified copy of his prison account statement for the six-month period preceding the filing of the complaint.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED if plaintiff fails to comply with this Order, the Court will dismiss this action without prejudice. If the case is dismissed for non-compliance with this Order, the dismissal will not count as a "strike" under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

So Ordered this 12th day of August, 2015.

/s/_________

E. RICHARD WEBBER

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Houston v. Lynch

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION
Aug 12, 2015
No. 4:15CV1217 ERW (E.D. Mo. Aug. 12, 2015)
Case details for

Houston v. Lynch

Case Details

Full title:ERIC HOUSTON, Plaintiff, v. LORETTA LYNCH, et al., Defendants

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

Date published: Aug 12, 2015

Citations

No. 4:15CV1217 ERW (E.D. Mo. Aug. 12, 2015)

Citing Cases

Strickler v. Means

An annuity given for life, determines upon the death of the annuitant. Wiegand v. Woerner, 155 Mo. App. 259;…

State ex Rel. Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Lucas

th v. Met. Life Ins. Co., 254 Pa. 510, 98 A. 1072; People ex rel. Met. Life Ins. Co. v. Knapp, 184 N.Y.S.…