IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

KURT TAYLOR, :

Plaintiff, :

vs. : CIVIL ACTION 05-0691-BH-M

COI J. JOHNSON, et al., :

Defendants. :

ORDER

This matter is before the Court for screening pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Upon review of the Complaint (Doc. 1),

and “Additional Defendant Names & Address” (Doc. 5) and “Cont.

Denial 4th, 6th 8th & 14th Admenments” (Doc. 6), which are be

treating as amendments to the Complaint, the Court finds that

these pleadings contain claims that are not related to each

other. That is, this action contains claims based on a dispute

over medical treatment, a disciplinary proceeding, the failure to

receive mail, a classification appeal, a denial of school books

and G.E.D. materials, Plaintiff’s fingers being slammed in the

tray slot, Chaplain Summers acting as an officer and not a

chaplain, Plaintiff slipping and falling while walking to the

shower, a failure to make adjustments in or to replace

Plaintiff’s leg prosthesis, and the denial of doctor and dentist

visits. In addition to the variety of claims, Plaintiff

identifies as Defendants persons outside of this District as well

Case 1:05-cv-00691-BH-M Document 7 Filed 01/17/06 Page 1 of 5
2

as persons within this District.

Plaintiff is ORDERED to file an amended complaint on or

before February 9, 2006, on this Court’s complaint form for a

section 1983 action. See Local Rule 83.9(d)(1) (requiring pro se

litigants to utilize Court’s forms). By completing the complaint

form, many pleading problems that are present in Plaintiff’s

complaint and amendments will be corrected. Plaintiff’s original

complaint and amendments will be superseded by this amended

complaint. That means Plaintiff shall no longer rely on those

documents. The amended complaint shall contain all of

Plaintiff’s claims so Plaintiff will not file shortly thereafter

other amendments in a piecemeal fashion as he has previously done

in this action.

However, that being said, the claims and Defendants in the

complaint form should be far less numerous that those contained

in the original complaint and amendments due to the following

pleading requirements that were not observed in the prior

pleadings. The complaint form’s instructions at page 1, C,

state: “Separate Case. It is necessary to file a separate

complaint for each claim unless the claims are related to the

same incident or issue.” Thus, for each different claim

Plaintiff must file a separate complaint and pay the $250.00

filing fee or, in lieu thereof, file a motion to proceed without

prepayment of fees.

Case 1:05-cv-00691-BH-M Document 7 Filed 01/17/06 Page 2 of 5
3

Therefore, Plaintiff must decide on which one claim he will

proceed in this action. Plaintiff is ORDERED file an amended 

complaint containing one claim and any claims that can be shown

closely related to it, i.e., arising out of the same incident or

facts. Claims concerning Defendants at prisons located in other

districts should be brought in other actions filed in the 

district where the prison is located. 

In Section III of the complaint form where Plaintiff must

identify each individual that he wants to be a Defendant, he is

ORDERED to provide facts to show that individual’s participation

or involvement in his claim. That is, Plaintiff must state what

that individual Defendant did or failed to do and what he or she

knew. If there are more Defendants than there are spaces on the

form, Plaintiff may attach additional pages to the form, but he

must follow the format contained in Section III for each

additional Defendant and identify his claim against each

Defendant. Furthermore, Plaintiff should be mindful when

pleading his amended complaint, his amended complaint must

overcome the Court’s screening process, which permits the Court

to dismiss an action as frivolous or for failure to state a

claim, before his action will be served on Defendants. See 28

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). Even though the courts give some

leniency to pro se litigants, the courts will not act as a

plaintiff’s de facto attorney or rewrite a deficient complaint. 

Case 1:05-cv-00691-BH-M Document 7 Filed 01/17/06 Page 3 of 5
4

GJR Investments, Inc. v. County of Escambia, Fla., 132 F.3d 1359,

1368 (11th Cir. 1998). 

Section 1983 requires that a causal connection be

demonstrated between each defendant’s actions, orders, customs,

or policies and a deprivation of a plaintiff’s federal rights in

order to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Zatler

v. Wainwright, 802 F.2d 397, 401 (11th Cir. 1986); Williams v.

Bennett, 689 F.2d 1370, 1380 (11th Cir.) (same), cert. denied,

464 U.S. 932, 104 S.Ct. 335, 78 L.Ed.2d 305 (1983). Moreover,

Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a) requires that a plaintiff plead “‘a short and

plain statement of the claim that will give the defendant fair

notice of what the plaintiff’s claim’ is and the grounds upon

which it rests.” Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics

Intelligence and Coordination Unit, 507 U.S. 163, 168, 113 S.Ct.

1160, 1163, 122 L.Ed.2d 517 (1993) (quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355

U.S. 41, 47 (1957)); see Fullman v. Graddick, 739 F.2d 553, 556-

57 (11th Cir. 1984) (finding vague and conclusory claims are

subject to dismissal). Furthermore, specific facts must be

alleged in order to state a claim under section 1983. Baxter v.

Rose, 305 F.3d 486, 490 (6th Cir. 2002) (holding the PLRA’s

screening provisions require more than notice pleading). “‘It is

not enough, to indicate merely that the plaintiff has a grievance

but sufficient detail must be given so that the defendant, and

the Court, can obtain a fair idea of the what the plaintiff is

Case 1:05-cv-00691-BH-M Document 7 Filed 01/17/06 Page 4 of 5
5

complaining, and can see that there is some legal basis for

recovery.’” L.S.T. , Inc. v. Crow, 49 F.3d 679, 684 (11th Cir.

1995) (quoting Fullman, supra ).

The Clerk is DIRECTED to send to Plaintiff a form for a

complaint under § 1983. The failure to file the amended

complaint within the prescribed time will result in the dismissal

of this action for failure to prosecute and to obey the Court’s

Order. Furthermore, the failure to plead an amended complaint

that complies with Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a), that is, a complaint that

provides fair notice to the Court and a Defendant of the claim

against Defendant, after being required to replead a complaint,

will result in the dismissal of the action under Fed.R.Civ.P.

41(b) for failure to comply with the Court’s Order. Pelletier v.

Zweifel, 921 F.2d 1465, 1522 n.103 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 502

U.S. 855, 112 S.Ct. 167, 116 L.Ed.2d 131 (1991).

DONE this 17th day of January, 2006.

s/BERT W. MILLING, JR. 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00691-BH-M Document 7 Filed 01/17/06 Page 5 of 5