FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEVEN T HC IRC UIT FEB RUARY 23, 2006 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 05- 14515 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D ocketN o. 04 -035 74 -C V -C A M -1 R O B E R T J . H E A R D , P la in tif f - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s M I L T O N E . B U D D Y N I X , J R ., A L A N A . A D A M S , T Y R O N E A L L E N , R B , G B , e t a l., D e f e n d a n ts - A p p e lle e s .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o rth e rn D is tr ic t o f G e o r g ia

_________________________ ( F e b r u ar y 23, 2006) B efo re A N D E R S O N , B IR C H an dB A R K E T T , C i rcu i tJu d g es.2

P E R C U R I A M: R ob ertJ. H eard, a pro se G eorgi a pri soner, appeal s the di stri ctcourt ’ s order di sm i ss i ng hi s c i vi l com pl ai ntw i th p re j ud i ce as a r es ul tof hi s non -c om pl i ance w ith a n o r d e rto c o n f

o rm h is c o m p la in t to th e r e q u ir e m e n ts o f F e d .R .C iv .P . 8 ( a ) . O n app ea l , H eard ar gu es , pro se, that , by di sm i ss i ng hi s c om pl ai nt , the di stri ct c o u rt r e tr o a c tiv e lye n la r g e dth e s c o p e o f its o r d e rd ir e c tin g h im to c o m p lyw ith R ul e 8( a ) , i n vi ol a t i on of due pr oc e s s . H e f

urthe ra r gue s tha tthe or de rdi s m i s s i ng h is c o m p la in t w a s n o t b a s e do n “ac le a rr e c o r do f d e la yo rw ilf

u l [ s ic ] c o n te m p t” and thata l es se r s anct i on w ou l d h ave s uffi ce d. H e argues thatthe di stri ctcourt ab u s e dits d is c r e tio n b e c au s e it d idn o t e x a m in e s u f f ic ie n tlyh is c la im s p r io rto di sm i ss i ng hi s c om pl ai nt , as re qu i re d b y F ed. R . C i v. P . 12 (b)( 6). F i nal l y, H eard r e c o u n ts th e f

a c tu a l b a s is f

o rh is c la im s , a r g u in g th a t th e yw e r e s u f f ic ie n t to s u rv iv e d is m is s a l. W e r evi ew orders di sm i ss i ng com pl ai nt s bas ed on no n-com pl i ance for an abus e of di s c r e t i on. K i l go v. R i c ks , 983 F . 2d 189, 192 ( 11th C i r . 1993) (c on ce rni ng di sm i ss al s und erF ed. R . C i v. P . 41 (b) f or fa i l ure t o com pl y w i th l ocal rul e s ) . R ul e 8( a ) ( 2) r e qui r e s tha tapl e a di ng c ont a i n a“ s horta nd pl a i n s t a t e m e ntof th e c la im ” s h o w in g th a t th e p le a d e ris e n title dto r e lie f . F e d .R .C iv .P . 8 ( a ) ( 2 ) . F e d e r a l R u le o f

C iv il P r o c e du r e 1 0 ( b ) r e q u ir e s th a t th e a v e rm e n ts o f ac la im “s h a ll3

be m ade i n n um bere d p ar agraph s, the cont ent s of e ac h o f w hi ch shal l be l i m i t ed as far a s pra ct i cabl e t o a st at em entof a s i ng l e s etof ci rc um st ance s . . . [and ] [e ] ac h c l a i m f ound upon as e pa r a t e tr a ns a c t i on oroc c urr e nc e . . . s ha l l be s t a t e d i n a s e p a r a te c o u n t.” F e d .R .C iv .P . 1 0 ( b ) . A lth o u g h p r o s e c o m p la in ts m u s t b e lib e r a lly construed, T raw i nski v. U ni t ed T ec h. , 31 3 F . 3d 12 95 , 12 97 (11th C i r. 20 02 ), such com pl ai nt s s t i l l m ustcom pl y w i th the procedural rul es go verni ng the prop erform of pl e a di ngs , M c N e i l v. U ni t e d S t a t e s , 508 U . S . 106, 113, 113 S . C t . 1980, 1984, 1 2 4 L .E d .2 d2 1 ( 1 9 9 3 ) . W e h av e d et erm i n edth at“ sh o t g u n ” co m p l ai n t s are n o tsu ffi ci en tp l ead i n g s, s ta tin g th a t: T he typ i cal s hot gun c om pl a i ntc ont a i ns s e ve r a l c ount s , e a c h one i nc orpor a t i ng byr e f

e ren ce the a l l e ga t i ons of i t s pr e de c e s s or s , l e a di ng to as itu a tio n w h e r e m o s t o f th e c o u n ts ( i.e ., a ll b u t th e f ir s t) c o n ta in i rrel ev an tfactu al al l eg at i o n s an dl eg al co n cl u si o n s. S tr a te g ic I n c o m e F u n dv . S p e a r , L e e d s & K e llo g g , 3 0 5 F .3 d1 2 9 3 , 1 2 9 5 & n . 9 (11th C i r. 20 02 ). In such ca se s, i ti s “ vi rtual l y i m po ss i bl e t o k no w w hi ch a lle g a tio n s o f

f a c t a r e in te n d e dto s up p o rt w h ic h c la im ( s ) f o rr e lie f ,” a n dap a rty f a c e dw ith s u c h ac o m p la in t is n o t e x p e c te dto d r a f t ar e s p o n s iv e p le a d in g . A n d e r s o n v . D is t. B d . o f T ru s te e s o f

C e n t. F la . C m ty . C o ll., 7 7 F .3 d3 6 4 , 3 6 6 ( 1 1 th C i r. 19 96 ). T here fore , i ti s i m po rt antfor acourtt o “ narr ow and d ef i ne the i ss ues f r om the e a r l i e s ts t a ge s of the l i t i ga t i on. ” E br a hi m i v. C i tyof H unt s vi l l e B d. of4

E du c. , 11 4 F . 3d 16 2, 16 5 (11 th C i r. 19 97 ). “ A bsentsuch ef fort s, shot gu n n ot i ce pl e a di ngs . . . w oul d i m pe de the or de r l y , e f f i c i e nt , a nd e c onom i c di s pos i t i on of di s put e s . ” I d. L o cal R u l e 4 1 . 3 st at es, “ T h e co u rtm ay, w i th o r w i th o u tn o t i ce t o th e p art i es, di s m i s s ac i vi l c a s e . . . i f . . . [ a ] pl a i nt i f

f . . . r e f us e [ s ] t o obe yal a w f

ul or de rof

the co u rt . . . . [A ] d i sm i ssal . . . o p erat es as an ad j u d i cat i o n up o n th e m eri t s . . . u n l ess the c ourts pe c i f

i e s othe rw i s e i n i t s or de rof di s m i s s a l . ” N . D . G a . R . 41. 3. T he di stri ctcourtm aydi sm i ss an ac t i on sua s po nt e und erF ed. R . C i v. P . 41 (b) f or fa i l ure t o pr os e c ut e orf

a i l ur e t o obe yac ourtor de r . F e d. R . C i v. P . 41( b) ; H i l de br a nd v. H o n e y w e ll, I n c ., 6 2 2 F .2 d1 7 9 , 1 8 1 ( 5 th C ir . 1 9 8 0 ) . W e h a v e h e ldth a t: [ t]h e le g a l s ta n d a r dto b e ap p l i e du n d e rR u le 4 1 ( b ) is w h e th e rth e r e is a c l ear r ec o rd of del ayor w i l l ful cont em ptand a fi nd i ng thatl es se r s a n c tio n s w o u ldn o t s u f f ic e . D is m is s a l o f

ac a s e w ith p r e

ju d ic e is c o n s i d e r e das a n c t i on of l a s tr e s o rt , ap p l i c ab l e o n l yi n e x tr e me ci rcu m st an ces. G of orth v. O w e ns , 766 F . 2d 1533, 1535 ( 11th C i r . 1985) ( quot a t i ons a nd c i t a t i on o m itte d ) . W e h a v e up h e lda n in v o lu n ta ryd is m is s a l w ith p r e ju d ic e u n d e rR u le 4 1 (b ) w h en a p ro se “ ap p el l an tn o to n l y ex h i b i t eda p att ern o f d el ay, b u tal so re ce i ved a w arni ng of di sm i ss aland ref used t o o bey c ou rtorders t o app ear. ” H e p p e r le v . J o h n s to n , 5 9 0 F .2 d6 0 9 , 6 1 3 ( 5 th C ir . 1 9 7 9 ) . D is m is s a l w ith p r e ju d ic e , h o w e v e r , is n o t p r o p e rif th e p la in tif

f n e g lig e n tlyf

a ile dto c o m p lyw ith5

the c ourt ’ s or de ra nd di d nota c ti n ba d f a i th. E . E . O . C . v. T r oyS t a t e U ni v. , 693 F . 2d 13 53 , 13 57 (11th C i r. 19 82 ). U pon r e vi e w of

the r e c or d, a nd c ons i de r a t i on of H e a r d’ s br i e f

, w e f i nd no r e v e r s ib le e rr o rh e r e . H e a r do r ig in a llyf ile da5 5 - p a g e , 1 2 - c o u n t c o m p la in t, a c c om pa ni e d bya27- pa ge a f f i da vi t , a ga i ns t100 de f

e nda nt s . E s s e nt i a l l y , the com pl ai ntand aff

i davi tal l eged thatthe defendant s had conspi re d w i th eac h o ther i n or de rt o “ obt a i n m one ya nd pr ope rtythr ough f r audul e ntm e a ns , ” t o de pr i ve the g o v e rn m e n t a n d“in m a te s o f th e irr ig h t to th e f

a ira n dh o n e s t s e rv ic e s o f as ta te of f i c i a l , ” a nd t o “ c onc e a l [ ] the c ons pi r a c y . ” O n M a r c h 14, 2005, H e a r d f i l e d a22- pa ge a m e nde d c om pl a i nt , i nc orpor a t i ng byr e f e r e nc e hi s or i gi na l c om pl a i nt , a ddi ng 4 de f e nda nt s , a nd a ddi ng 1 c ounta nd the n f i l e d a19- pa ge s e c ond a f f i da vi ta nd s up p le m e n ta l s ta te m e n t o f f a c ts . O n M a y1 9 , 2 0 0 5 , th e d is tr ic t c o u rt, w ith o u t a d d r e s s in g h is m o tio n s a n dw ith “du e r e g a r dto [ H e a r d ’s ] p r o s e s ta tu s ,” o r d e r e dh im to a m e n d“h is c o m p la in t to bri ng i ti nt o com pl i ance w i th [R ul e] 8(a) . ” S peci fi ca l l y, the di stri ctcourtordered H e a r dto “s u b m it ac o m p la in t th a t p r e c is e lys p e c if ie [ d ] in ‘s h o rt a n dp la in st at em ent s, ’ am on g o ther thi ng s, w hi ch ri gh t s are cl ai m ed t o h ave been vi ol at ed and h ow , w hen and by w ho m they w er e vi ol at ed. ” T he di stri ctcourtfurther o r d e r e dth a t H e a r d“n a m e o n lyth o s e d e f e n d a n ts w h o [ w e r e ] ab s o lu te lye s s e n tia l to6

hi s c l ai m s. ” ( Id. ). F i nal l y, the di stri ctcourtspec i fi ca l l y w arned that , i f H eard fa i l ed t o com pl y w i th i t s order , hi s a ct i on w ou l d b e di sm i ss ed pu rs uantt o N . D . G a. R . 4 1 .2 . H e a r d the n f

i l e d a43- pa ge s e c ond a m e nde d c om pl a i nt , i nc orpor a t i ng by r e f e r e nc e hi s f

i r s tc om pl a i nt , f

i r s ta f f i da vi t , a m e nde d c om pl a i nt , a nd s e c ond a f f id a v it, a n dn a m in g 1 0 2 d e f e n d a n ts , m a k in g c le a rth a t h e d idn o t e v e n a tte m p t to c o m p lyw ith th e d is tr ic t c o u rt’s o r d e r . W e f in dn o ab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n . AF F I RME D.