Riley v. Riley
| Richard James Dion Riley |
| Richard Dudley Riley |
| 8:2026cv01525 |
| May 18, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida |
| Thomas P Barber |
| Sean P Flynn |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 9, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 4
ENDORSED ORDER: The Eleventh Circuit has held that an order dismissing a complaint with leave to amend within a specified time becomes a final judgment when the plaintiff misses that deadline to amend without seeking an extension of time. See Auto. Alignment & Body Serv., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 953 F.3d 707, 719-20 (11th Cir. 2020). The Court previously dismissed Plaintiff's complaint and granted leave to amend on or before June 22, 2026. See (Doc. 3). Plaintiff has failed to file an amended complaint by the deadline, so the Court's June 8, 2026, Order constitutes a final judgment. The Clerk is directed to terminate any pending motions and deadlines, and thereafter close this case. Signed by Judge Thomas P. Barber on 7/9/2026. (RL)
|
|
Filing 3
ENDORSED ORDER: Upon review, the Court finds the amended complaint (Doc. #2) constitutes an impermissible shotgun pleading. See Weiland v. Palm Beach Cnty. Sheriff's Off., 792 F.3d 1313, 1324 (11th Cir. 2015). The amended complaint improperly fails to separate into different counts each of the plaintiff's causes of action -- in fact, the amended complaint does not present any causes of action. See id. at 1322-23 ("The third type of shotgun pleading is one that commits the sin of not separating into a different count each cause of action or claim for relief."). As a whole, the amended complaint is so vague and confusing that the defendant is not given sufficient notice as to the nature of the claims and the facts upon which they are based. See Jackson v. Bank of America, N.A., 898 F.3d 1348,1358 (11th Cir. 2018) ("The pleading is vague and ambiguous such that [the defendants have] to guess as to... the facts upon which [the plaintiff relies] in support.") (quotation omitted). Further, the claims should be stated "in numbered paragraphs, each limited as far as practicable to a single set of circumstances." Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a). The complaint does not comply with Rule 10(a). Finally, the amended complaint does not set forth any basis for subject matter jurisdiction. It does not assert any claims under federal law. In addition, it fails to identify the citizenship of the parties, or the amount in controversy. Accordingly, the amended complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and Plaintiff is granted leave to amend his complaint no later than June 22, 2026. If Plaintiff amends his complaint, he must pay the $405 filing fee or move to proceed in forma pauperis at the time that he files the second amended complaint. If Plaintiff fails to amend the complaint, submits another shotgun pleading, or does not pay the filing fee or move to proceed in forma pauperis, this action may be dismissed without further notice. Signed by Judge Thomas P. Barber on 6/8/2026. (ANL)
|
| Filing 2 AMENDED COMPLAINT against Richard Dudley Riley filed by Richard James Dion Riley. Related document: #1 Complaint filed by Richard James Dion Riley. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Mailing Envelope)(CTR) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Richard Dudley Riley filed by Richard James Dion Riley. (No IFP Filed - Filing Fee Not Paid) (Attachments: #1 Mailing Envelope)(MCB) |
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: Riley v. Riley | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Richard James Dion Riley | |
| 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: Richard Dudley Riley | |
| 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.
