OFFICE OF COUNTY ATTORNEY, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA

TELEPHONE 305.375.5151

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

www.flsb.uscourts.gov

In re:

ALBERTO SOLAR SOMOHANO

Debtor.

__________________________________________/

Case No. 20-22697-BKC-AJC

Chapter 7

ALBERTO SOLER

Plaintiff,

v.

FHFA, Government Sponsor Enterprise, et al.

Defendants

_________________________________________/

Adversary No. 21-01054-AJC

MIAMI-DADE COUNTY’S MOTION TO

DISMISS AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE

Defendant, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida (the 

“County”), moves this Court pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), made 

applicable to this proceeding by Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7012, to dismiss the 

Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (D.E. 25), and in support respectfully represents:

INTRODUCTION

1. As noted by the Defendants 3DCA and Judge Hanzman in their Motion to Dismiss 

(D.E. 32), the Amended Complaint is only slightly less incomprehensible than Plaintiff’s original 

complaint, but its “continued broad allegations make it unclear for the Defendants as to what, if 

any, acts or omissions led to any alleged harm to the Plaintiff.” (p.2, D.E. 32). The same holds true 

for the allegations made against the County. There are no allegations of acts or omissions by the 

County that led to any alleged harm to the Plaintiff.

Case 21-01054-AJC Doc 82 Filed 07/16/21 Page 1 of 4
2 | Page

OFFICE OF COUNTY ATTORNEY, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA

TELEPHONE 305.375.5151

2. The County should be dismissed with prejudice on many of the same grounds and 

defenses asserted by Defendants 3DCA and Judge Hanzman (the “3DCA Defendants”), and by 

Defendants Robertson, Anschutz, Schneid, Crane & Partners, PLLC and Kondaur Capital, LLC

(“Robertson Defendants”) in their Motion to Dismiss (D.E. 11).

JOINDER

3. The County joins and specifically incorporates by reference the following 

arguments and points of law raised by the 3DCA and Robertson Defendants herein in the 

corresponding Docket Entry: (a) the Amended Complaint is a shotgun pleading that fails to state 

a cause of action against the County (D.E. 32), and; (b) the relief requested in the Amended 

Complaint is barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine (D.E. 11).

A. Failure to state a cause of action

4. As asserted by the 3DCA Defendants, the Amended Complaint is a “shotgun” 

pleading. See 3DCA MTD, D.E. 32. A complaint that “fails to articulate claims with sufficient

clarity to allow the defendant to frame a responsive pleading constitutes a ‘shotgun pleading.’” See

Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2) (requiring “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader 

is entitled to relief.”). Often, “shotgun pleadings” are “confusing, incoherent, and clogged with

seemingly irrelevant...allegations,” and are therefore appropriate for dismissal. Lampkin-Asam v. 

Volusia County School Board, 261 Fed.Appx. 274, 277 (11th Cir. 2008).

5. The Amended Complaint names the County as a defendant in Counts 2 and 3, but 

it is nearly impossible to know which, if any, facts are alleged in support thereof. The defects of 

the Amended Complaint make it impossible for the County to intelligently respond to the 

Amended Complaint or determine what defenses they may have. Assuch, the Amended Complaint 

Case 21-01054-AJC Doc 82 Filed 07/16/21 Page 2 of 4
3 | Page

OFFICE OF COUNTY ATTORNEY, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA

TELEPHONE 305.375.5151

fails to give the fair notice contemplated by Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. It is a 

shotgun pleading and must be dismissed.

6. In addition, the Amended Complaint fails to state a cause of action against the 

County for another reason. It seeks relief relating to the foreclosure sale of Plaintiff’s father’s home

several years ago. The County is not involved in foreclosure proceedings. Foreclosure sales and 

distributions are administered by the Clerk of Court, not by the Mayor’s Office or the Board of 

County Commissioners. The Clerk of Court is an independently elected office. The County 

Attorney’s Office does not represent the Court Clerk’s Office. Therefore, the allegations made 

against the County are misplaced, and the County should be dismissed from this lawsuit with 

prejudice.

B. Rooker-Feldman doctrine bars the relief requested

7. As asserted by the Robertson Defendants, the Amended Complaint is barred by the 

Rooker-Feldman Doctrine. See Robertson Defendants MTD, D.E. 11 (citing Valentine v. BAC 

Home Loans Servicing, L.P., 635 F. App’x 753, 756 (11th Cir. 2015) (citation omitted)).

8. Here, Plaintiff’s claims against the County arise entirely from the state court 

foreclosure action. The Amended Complaint’s Counts—while disjointed, unclear, and lacking 

critical facts—likewise reflect that they arise from the state court foreclosure litigation. Perhaps 

most significantly, in his “Prayer for Relief”—which apparently serves as the requested relief for 

all Counts—Plaintiff asks this Court to second-guess the state court’s entry of Final Judgment of 

Foreclosure. Under the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine, this Court lacks jurisdiction to do so. 

Amendment cannot cure this Court’s lack of jurisdiction. Therefore, dismissal should be granted 

with prejudice.

Case 21-01054-AJC Doc 82 Filed 07/16/21 Page 3 of 4
4 | Page

OFFICE OF COUNTY ATTORNEY, MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA

TELEPHONE 305.375.5151

WHEREFORE, the County respectfully requests the Court dismiss the County from this 

action with prejudice, and grant such other relief as is just and proper.

Respectfully submitted,

GERALDINE BONZON-KEENAN

Miami-Dade County Attorney

By: /s/ Ileana Cruz

Ileana Cruz, Assistant County Attorney

Florida Bar No. 419140

Stephen P. Clark Center, Suite 2810

111 Northwest 1st Street 

Miami, FL 33128-1993

Telephone: (305) 375-5296

Email: ileanac@miamidade.gov

 cao.bkc@miamidade.gov

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of this document is being filed 

electronically via the Clerk’s CM/ECF website. Copies of the document will be furnished on July 

16, 2021, by Notice of Electronic Filing (“NEF”) via the CM/ECF system to those parties and

counsel authorized to receive NEF.

By: /s/ Ileana Cruz

Ileana Cruz, Assistant County Attorney

Case 21-01054-AJC Doc 82 Filed 07/16/21 Page 4 of 4