IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 9, 2009
THOMAS JOHN HEILMAN, PLAINTIFF,
M. FISHER, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is the amended complaint filed May 21, 2009. The amended complaint is 104 pages long with an additional 123 pages of exhibits.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a) provides that complaints must contain short and plain statements of the claims. Plaintiff's amended complaint does not comply with Rule 8 because it is clear that plaintiff can state his claims in a much shorter pleading. For this reason, the amended complaint is dismissed with leave to amend. The second amended complaint may be no longer than 30 pages.
If plaintiff files a second amended complaint, he is not required to include a points and authorities detailing the legal theories of his claims. All that is required is a brief summary of his factual allegations against the defendants. In addition, plaintiff is not required to submit exhibits in support of his claims.
On May 20, 2009, plaintiff filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. On March 2, 2009, the court granted plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis. Accordingly, plaintiff's May 20, 2009, motion to proceed in forma pauperis is disregarded because it is unnecessary.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. Plaintiff's May 20, 2009, motion to proceed in forma pauperis (no. 14) is disregarded;
2. The amended complaint filed May 21, 2009, is dismissed with thirty day days to file a second amended complaint that is no longer than 30 pages; failure to file a second amended complaint in compliance with this order will result in a recommendation of dismissal of this action.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.