Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Abbott v. Corizon, LLC

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Jacksonville Division

July 16, 2019

ROBERT ABBOTT, Plaintiff,
v.
CORIZON, LLC and WOODROW A. MEYERS, JR., Defendants.

          ORDER

          MONTE C. RICHARDSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Plaintiff, an inmate of the Florida penal system, initiated this action by filing a pro se Civil Rights Complaint (Doc. 1) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § l983. Plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis. See Order (Doc. 5). As defendants, Plaintiff names Corizon, LLC and Woodrow A. Meyers, Jr., in his role as Chief Operating Officer of Corizon. Plaintiff asserts Corizon, pursuant to a company policy, excessively delayed approving surgery to correct his broken wrist, in violation of the Eighth Amendment. As relief, he seeks compensatory and punitive damages.

         To proceed, Plaintiff must file an amended complaint on the enclosed civil rights complaint form and in compliance with federal pleading standards. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) requires a pleading to include a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. Plaintiff's allegations are not “short and plain.” Plaintiff includes argument, case citations, and “evidence” to substantiate his claims. In amending his complaint, Plaintiff should streamline his allegations to comply with Rule 8. And he should not include legal argument or evidence. To the extent the case proceeds, Plaintiff will have an opportunity later to present legal argument and evidence.

         If Plaintiff chooses to file an amended complaint, he should assess his case and name as defendants only those individuals allegedly responsible for violating his federal constitutional rights. Currently, Plaintiff names Woodrow A. Meyers as a defendant, though he does not attribute any factual allegations or wrongdoing to Defendant Meyers. To the extent Plaintiff names Defendant Meyers in his official capacity as a representative of Corizon, such a claim is redundant of the one against Corizon.

         Plaintiff also should clearly articulate the nature of his claim against each named defendant by stating the specific constitutional right or federal law each defendant allegedly violated. To the extent Plaintiff intends to assert a conspiracy claim under § 1983, he should know a corporation may not conspire with itself or its employees. A conspiracy requires a “multiplicity of actors.” McAndrew v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 206 F.3d 1031, 1036 (11th Cir. 2000).

         In amending his complaint, Plaintiff must also adhere to the following general instructions.

         1. The amended complaint must be marked, “Amended Complaint.” 2. The amended complaint must name as defendants only those who had been acting under color of state law and are responsible for the alleged constitutional violation.

         3. The amended complaint must state the full names of each defendant (to the extent Plaintiff knows them) in the style of the case on the first page and in section I.B.

         4. The list of defendants named on the first page must match the list of named defendants in section I.B.

         5. The amended complaint (or a separate filing) must include current addresses for each defendant so the Court can direct service of process.

         6. Under “Basis for Jurisdiction” in section II, Plaintiff must state the specific constitutional right or federal law each defendant allegedly violated.

         7. In section IV, “Statement of Claim, ” there must be a clear description of how each defendant was involved in the alleged violation(s). The allegations should be stated in numbered paragraphs, each limited to a single set of circumstances. Plaintiff should separately explain the facts giving rise to his individual claims for relief, and he should clearly state how each defendant is responsible for each alleged violation.[1]

         8. In section V, “Injuries, ” there must be a statement concerning how each defendant's ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.