Freeman v. Freeman
| David A. Freeman |
| Tara Freeman |
| 8:2025cv01803 |
| July 14, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
| Lindsay S Griffin |
| Kathryn Kimball Mizelle |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 1, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Local Rule 1.11(e), which provides that, unless an order states another time, a seal under Rule 1.11 expires ninety days after a case is closed and all appeals are exhausted. To prevent the content of a sealed item from appearing on the docket after the seal expires, a party or interested non-party must move for relief before the seal expires. (Signed by Deputy Clerk). (LD) |
| Filing 7 JUDGMENT dismissing this action without prejudice. ( Signed by Deputy Clerk) (LD) |
Filing 6
ENDORSED ORDER dismissing action without prejudice because the earlier Order (Doc. 5) striking the Complaint as a shotgun pleading has now become a final order. See Auto. Alignment & Body Serv., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 953 F.3d 707, 719-22 (11th Cir. 2020) ("Hertz [Corp. v. Alamo Rent-A-Car, Inc., 16 F.3d 1126 (11th Cir. 1994)] establishes that an order dismissing a complaint with leave to amend within a specified time becomes a final judgment if the time allowed for amendment expires without the plaintiff seeking an extension. And when the order becomes a final judgment, the district court loses 'all its prejudgment powers to grant any more extensions' of time to amend the complaint." (citations omitted)). The Clerk is directed to ENTER JUDGMENT, which shall read "This action is dismissed without prejudice," and to CLOSE this case. Signed by Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle on 7/31/2025. (KMP)
|
|
Filing 5
ENDORSED ORDER: Upon review, the Court finds that the plaintiff's #1 Complaint constitutes an impermissible shotgun pleading. See Weiland v. Palm Beach Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 792 F.3d 1313, 1324 (11th Cir. 2015). Specifically, it is replete with "vague" and "conclusory" factual allegations. Id. at 1322. Regarding the circumstances giving rise to this action, the plaintiff references several individuals not named as defendants in the action and only vaguely references the defendant, alleging that the defendant "concealed" the whereabouts of the property at issue and "asserted control." Compl. Additionally, the complaint does not specify how the defendant violated each cause of action or specify whether the causes of action are state or federal laws. See id. This fails to give the defendants "adequate notice of the claims against them and the grounds upon which" they rest. Weiland, 792 F.3d at 1322. Accordingly, the plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED. The #2 Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, #3 Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, and #4 Motion for Service by U.S. Marshal are DENIED as moot. The plaintiff is granted leave to amend his complaint and file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis no later than July 28, 2025. Failure to amend his complaint or submitting another shotgun pleading may result in this action being dismissed without further notice. If the plaintiff files an amended complaint, he should also clarify on what basis he believes his action is entitled to federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331. The only identifiable federal statute in his complaint is 42 U.S.C. 1983, which is only applicable in suits against government officials, but the defendant in this action does not appear to be a government official. Signed by Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle on 7/15/2025. (KMP)
|
| Filing 4 MOTION for Service by U.S. Marshal by David A. Freeman. (Attachments: #1 Mailing Envelope)(AA) |
| Filing 3 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by David A. Freeman. (Attachments: #1 Mailing Envelope)(AA) Motions referred to Magistrate Judge Lindsay S. Griffin. |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by David A. Freeman. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order, #2 Mailing Envelope)(AA)(Note: Chambers has been notified.) Modified text on 7/14/2025 (AA). |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief against Tara Freeman filed by David A. Freeman. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum of Law is Support of Verfied Complain, #2 Evidentiary Statement, #3 Exhibit A-E, #4 Proposed Judgment, #5 Proposed Summons, #6 Civil Cover Sheet, #7 Mailing Envelope)(AA) (Note: Chambers has been notified.)Modified on 7/14/2025 (AA). |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Florida Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Freeman v. Freeman | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: David A. Freeman | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Tara Freeman | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
