Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-5_15-cv-00299/USCOURTS-ared-5_15-cv-00299-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

PINE BLUFF DIVISION 

NANCY KING PLAINTIFF 

v. No. 5:15-cv-299-DPM 

VIV A BEVERAGES DEFENDANT 

ORDER 

Ms. King didn't respond to Viva Beverages' motion to dismiss. But the 

motion lacks any merit. The company asks the Court to dismiss King's suit 

because she used the wrong prose form-because, after paying $400 to file 

suit, she made an ADA claim with a Title VII form. That doesn't matter. Pro 

se folks don't have to plead "with legal nicety." Topchian v. JPMorgan Chase 

Bank N.A., 760 F.3d 843, 849 (8th Cir. 2014). They must give the other side fair 

notice of claims. The company's motion is premised on the fact that King did 

so. Requiring her to find and file another form at this point would slow down 

the case without good reason. FED. R. CIV. P. 1. Motion, Ng 10, denied. 

So Ordered. 

D.P. Marshall ff. 

United States District Judge 

Case 5:15-cv-00299-DPM Document 15 Filed 04/27/16 Page 1 of 1