Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Faurot v. Terhune

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


August 4, 2008

MARK CONRAD FAUROT, II, PLAINTIFF,
v.
C A TERHUNE, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Morrison C. England, Jr. United States District Judge

ORDER

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

On May 23, 2008, the assigned magistrate judge in this case dismissed plaintiff's 526-page hand-written complaint because it was neither short nor plain as required by Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The court granted plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint of no more than twenty-five (25) pages in length. On June 12, 2008, plaintiff filed a motion to reinstate his original complaint. On June 19, 2008, the assigned magistrate judge explained to plaintiff again that, under Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a pleading must contain "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). On July 14, 2008, plaintiff filed a request for reconsideration of the magistrate judge's orders filed May 23, 2008 and June 19, 2008.

Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule 72-303(f), a magistrate judge's orders shall be upheld unless "clearly erroneous or contrary to law." Upon review of the entire file, the court finds that it does not appear that the magistrate judge's ruling was clearly erroneous or contrary to law. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2); Hearns v. San Bernardino Police Dep't, ___ F.3d ___, 2008 WL 2579243 at *5 (9th Cir. July 1, 2008) (a complaint that is "so verbose, confused, and redundant that its true substance, if any, is well disguised" violates Rule 8).

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Upon reconsideration, the orders of the magistrate judge filed May 23, 2008 and June 19, 2008, are affirmed; and

2. Plaintiff is granted thirty days from the date of service of this order to file an amended complaint of no more than twenty-five (25) pages in length in accordance with the assigned magistrate judge's May 23, 2008 order.

20080804

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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