Brown v. Clemons-Abdullah

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI

EASTERN DIVISION

ANTHONY L. BROWN, JR., )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 4:23-CV-1082 RLW

)

JENNIFER CLEMONS-ABDULLAH, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Before the Court is self-represented Plaintiff Anthony L. Brown, Jr.’s amended

complaint. For the reasons explained below, Plaintiff will be given the opportunity to file a

second amended complaint.

Background

As fully explained in this Court’s prior Memorandum and Order of December 5, 2023

(ECF No. 10), Plaintiff’s original 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint asserted unrelated conditions-of-

confinement claims against 12 defendants. In addition, the complaint was unnecessarily long

and contained a great deal of unnecessary information, and it violated Rules 8(a) and 10(b) of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff made those problems worse by filing a supplemental

document containing additional claims, and asking the Court to incorporate them into the

complaint.

The Court conducted the initial review required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), and gave

Plaintiff the opportunity to file an amended complaint. The Court gave Plaintiff clear and

specific instructions about how to prepare the amended complaint, and clearly explained the

requirements of Rules 8(a), 10(b), 18(a), and 20(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

The First Amended Complaint

Plaintiff responded to the Court’s Memorandum and Order by filing a first amended

complaint against not 12 but 14 defendants. In setting forth his claims for relief, Plaintiff

describes events that occurred from approximately May 27, 2023 through approximately

December 17, 2023. It appears most of Plaintiff’s claims stem from alleged denials of contact

lens supplies and medical care for an eye condition. However, despite the Court’s prior

instructions, it appears Plaintiff also attempts to assert claims stemming from allegedly excessive

force, falling down the stairs, confinement to a cell with 24-hour illumination, failure to respond

to grievances, and a refusal to move him from top-tier accommodations, among others.

Also, Plaintiff’s allegations are not simple, concise, and direct, and his claims are not

stated in numbered paragraphs that are limited to a single set of circumstances. The first

amended complaint includes a great deal of unnecessary detail, and it is often unclear exactly

what allegations Plaintiff intends to assert against which defendants. For example, Plaintiff

writes:

On December 17, 2023 I woke up with mucus build up and eye pain because I

still had my contacts in my eyes. When I pressed my intercom CO Whitt told me

that Lt. Adams and Lt. Livingston-Ward said they put me on lockdown and that I

couldn’t go to medical. I asked him what a lockdown had to do with my medical

care and asked him to call the captain on duty. I explained that I was in pain but

he kept telling me they said no. I had to throw my lunch tray on the floor just to

get the whiteshirt in the unit Lt. Borders, Lt. Adams, and Lt. Chapman came to

my cell door and I told Lt. Borders that Lt. Adams and Livingston-Ward were

retaliating we keep getting into verbal altercations because they always take me to

medical in the morning around 11 or later so I won’t be able to utilize my rec time

with poor vision. They still didn’t take me to medical. Nurse Hatcher said she put

it in my journal that she called for me but was told I was on lockdown. Since I

moved back to 5b writ pod I’ve been forced to sleep with my contacts September

10th, 11th, 14th, 15th, 17th, 19th, 20th, 24th, 26th, 27th, 29th, October 2nd, 3rd,

4th, 5th, 7th, 9th, 17th, 18th, 21st, 22nd, 23rd, 27th, 30th, 31st, November 3rd,

4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 11th, 12th, 16th, 18th, 19th, 20th, 21st, 22nd, 23rd, 25th,

26th, 27th, 28th, 30th, December 2nd, 5th, 6th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 11th, 13th, 14th,

15th, 16th, 17th causing a severe damage in my vision.

(ECF No. 11 at 16).

Also, Plaintiff often lists a group of defendants and then makes general allegations of

wrongdoing against them. For example, Plaintiff writes:

Around August 5, 2023 the control panel in medical went out causing the two big

light fixtures in med room 1 and 4 to stay on for 24 hours of the day. I

complained to every nurse in medical, every supervisor that came in medical

including Clemons-Abdullah, Darnel Speer, Tammy Ross, Marilyn Earvin, and

Unit Manager Brock, that the constant illumination was giving me migraines, I

was having light sensitivity and suffering from sleep deprivation. No one would

move me.

Id. at 15.

Discussion

Like the original complaint, the first amended complaint asserts multiple unrelated claims

against multiple defendants. As fully explained in this Court’s prior order, a plaintiff may join

multiple defendants in one action only if he asserts a right to relief against them that arises from

the same transaction or occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences, and presents

common questions of law or fact. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2). Plaintiff’s first amended

complaint violates this rule. In addition, Plaintiff’s allegations are not simple, concise, and

direct, as required by Rule 8(a), and are not set forth in numbered paragraphs that are limited to a

single set of circumstances, as required by Rule 10(b). As a result, to figure out what Plaintiff’s

actual claims are against each of the 14 defendants, the Court would have to examine the first

amended complaint in great depth and then attempt to interpret it, to determine what Plaintiff is

actually asserting against each named defendant. This creates an undue burden for the Court

which it is not required to undertake, as the Rules are intended to avoid placing such a burden on

the Court. Plaintiff’s practice of grouping defendants together and generally asserting

wrongdoing also violates Rule 8, as it fails to provide adequate notice of the grounds for the

claims made against each defendant.

Because Plaintiff is representing himself, the Court will give him one more opportunity to

amend his complaint. Plaintiff is advised that the second amended complaint will replace the

original and first amended complaints entirely. See In re Wireless Telephone Federal Cost

Recovery Fees Litigation, 396 F.3d 922, 928 (8th Cir. 2005) (“It is well-established that an

amended complaint supersedes an original complaint and renders the original complaint without

legal effect”). Plaintiff must type or neatly print the second amended complaint on the Court’s

prisoner civil rights complaint form, which will be provided to him. See E.D. Mo. L.R. 2.06(A)

(“All actions brought by self-represented plaintiffs or petitioners should be filed on Court-

provided forms where applicable.”).

In the “Caption” section of the complaint form, Plaintiff should write the name of the

defendant he intends to sue. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a). Plaintiff must avoid naming anyone as a

defendant unless that person is directly related to his claim. Plaintiff must also specify the

capacity in which he intends to sue the defendant.

In the “Statement of Claim” section, Plaintiff should begin by writing the defendant’s

name. In separate, numbered paragraphs under that name, Plaintiff should set forth a short and

plain statement of the facts that support his claim or claims against that defendant. See Fed. R.

Civ. P. 8(a). Plaintiff’s averments must be simple, concise, and direct. See id. Plaintiff must

state his claims in numbered paragraphs, and each paragraph should be “limited as far as

practicable to a single set of circumstances.” See Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). Plaintiff is advised to

avoid including unnecessary detail in the amended complaint. Plaintiff will have the opportunity

to present evidence in support of his claims if and when this case proceeds to the later stages of

litigation.

If Plaintiff names a single defendant, he may set forth as many claims as he has against

that defendant. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 18(a). However, if Plaintiff names more than one defendant,

he may only include claims that arise out of the same transaction or occurrence, or simply put,

claims that are related to each other. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2). Plaintiff may file a separate

civil action to assert any unrelated claim or claims.

It is important that Plaintiff allege facts explaining how each defendant was personally

involved in or directly responsible for harming him. See Madewell v. Roberts, 909 F.2d 1203,

1208 (8th Cir. 1990). Plaintiff must explain the defendant’s role in allegedly violating Plaintiff’s

rights, so the defendant will have notice of what he or she is accused of doing or failing to do.

See Topchian v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 760 F.3d 843, 848 (8th Cir. 2014) (stating that the

essential function of a complaint “is to give the opposing party fair notice of the nature and basis

or grounds for a claim.”). Further, the Court emphasizes that the “Statement of Claim” requires

more than “labels and conclusions or a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action.”

See Neubauer v. FedEx Corp., 849 F.3d 400, 404 (8th Cir. 2017). Finally, Plaintiff must avoid

attempting to amend a complaint by filing separate documents containing changes he wishes to

make to certain parts. The second amended complaint will be subject to initial review pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff must file a second amended complaint that

fully complies with the instructions in this Memorandum and Order, by May 23, 2024.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall mail to Plaintiff a copy of the Court’s

form Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint Under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Plaintiff's failure to timely and fully comply with the instructions set forth in this

Memorandum and Order will result in the dismissal of this case, without prejudice and

without further notice.

RONNIE L. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated this 9th day of May, 2024.