Brinson v. Gillison

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION

ADRIAN LAMAR BRINSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CV423-039 ) SGT. BRITTANY BEARD and ) OFFICER STRICKLAND, ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER Given pro se plaintiff Adrian Lamar Brinson’s filing of multiple pleadings in this case, the Court stayed it and directed him to file a single Amended Complaint. See doc. 23. He has now complied with that instruction, although it is not clear that he complied timely.1 See doc. 27.

1 “Under the ‘prison mailbox rule,’ a pro se prisoner’s court filing is deemed filed on the date it is delivered to prison authorities for mailing.” Williams v. McNeil, 557 F.3d 1287, 1290 n. 2 (11th Cir. 2009). “Absent evidence to the contrary . . ., [courts] will assume that [a prisoner’s filing] was delivered to prison authorities on the day he signed it . . . .” Washington v. United States, 243 F.3d 1299, 1301 (11th Cir. 2001). Brinson’s signature is dated, impossibly, “nov 14 2023.” See doc. 27 at 15. He has also included a cover letter with his Amended Complaint that suggests that he might seek a retroactive extension of his deadline. See id. at 16. The envelope in which he submitted his Amended Complaint is postmarked September 28, 2023. See id. at 18. Given those ambiguities, the Court will not take any action sua sponte concerning the timeliness of Brinson’s compliance. However, to the extent that any defendant wishes to challenge the Amended Complaint’s propriety, they remain free to seek any relief they deem appropriate. Since Brinson has arguably complied with the Court’s instructions, the Clerk is DIRECTED to LIFT the Stay. See doc. 23. Defendants are DIRECTED to file any pleadings responsive to the Amended Complaint by no later than October 19, 2023. Cf. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(8). SO ORDERED, this 6th day of October, 20238. ( hide lie CHRISTOPHER L. RAY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA