Garcia v. City of Carlsbad Board Members

D. New Mexico

Garcia v. City of Carlsbad Board Members

DecidedSeptember 21, 2022

Docket2:22-cv-00668

StatusUnknown

This text of Garcia v. City of Carlsbad Board Members (Garcia v. City of Carlsbad Board Members) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. New Mexico primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Garcia v. City of Carlsbad Board Members, (D.N.M. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO JESUS M. GARCIA, Plaintiff, v. No. 22-cv-0668 SMV CITY OF CARLSBAD BOARD MEMBERS, et al.,1 Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER TO AMEND THIS MATTER is before the Court on pro se Plaintiff’s Civil Complaint, filed September 12, 2022, and consisting of three pages and 44 pages of exhibits. [Doc. 1]. The

Complaint contains conclusory allegations regarding violations of constitutional rights and state law and vague allegations of “actions taken by officials” but does not contain factual allegations regarding each Defendant. Although “a complaint need not provide ‘detailed factual allegations,’ it must give just enough factual detail to provide ‘fair notice of what the claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.’” Warnick v. Cooley, 895 F.3d 746, 751 (10th Cir. 2018) (ellipsis omitted) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). The Complaint fails to state a claim on which relief can be granted because it does not describe what each Defendant did to Plaintiff. See Nasious v. Two Unknown B.I.C.E. Agents, at Arapahoe County Justice Center, 492 F.3d 1158, 1163 (10th Cir. 2007) (“[T]o state a claim in federal court, a complaint must explain

1 Although the Complaint uses the abbreviation “et. al [sic]” in the caption, it names no Defendant other than “City of Carlsbad Board Members.” [Doc. 1]. what each defendant did to [the plaintiff]; when the defendant did it; how the defendant’s action harmed [the plaintiff]; and, what specific legal right the plaintiff believes the defendant violated.”’). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that no later than October 12, 2022, Plaintiff file an amended complaint specifically describing what each Defendant did to Plaintiff; when each Defendant did it; how each Defendant’s action harmed Plaintiff; and what specific legal right Plaintiff believes each Defendant violated. Failure to timely file an adequate amended complaint may result in dismissal of this case without further warning. IT IS SO ORDERED.

STEPHAN M. VIDMAR United States Magistrate Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO JESUS M. GARCIA, Plaintiff, v. No. 22-cv-0668 SMV CITY OF CARLSBAD BOARD MEMBERS, et al.,1 Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER TO AMEND THIS MATTER is before the Court on pro se Plaintiff’s Civil Complaint, filed September 12, 2022, and consisting of three pages and 44 pages of exhibits. [Doc. 1]. The

Complaint contains conclusory allegations regarding violations of constitutional rights and state law and vague allegations of “actions taken by officials” but does not contain factual allegations regarding each Defendant. Although “a complaint need not provide ‘detailed factual allegations,’ it must give just enough factual detail to provide ‘fair notice of what the claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.’” Warnick v. Cooley, 895 F.3d 746, 751 (10th Cir. 2018) (ellipsis omitted) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)). The Complaint fails to state a claim on which relief can be granted because it does not describe what each Defendant did to Plaintiff. See Nasious v. Two Unknown B.I.C.E. Agents, at Arapahoe County Justice Center, 492 F.3d 1158, 1163 (10th Cir. 2007) (“[T]o state a claim in federal court, a complaint must explain

1 Although the Complaint uses the abbreviation “et. al [sic]” in the caption, it names no Defendant other than “City of Carlsbad Board Members.” [Doc. 1]. what each defendant did to [the plaintiff]; when the defendant did it; how the defendant’s action harmed [the plaintiff]; and, what specific legal right the plaintiff believes the defendant violated.”’). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that no later than October 12, 2022, Plaintiff file an amended complaint specifically describing what each Defendant did to Plaintiff; when each Defendant did it; how each Defendant’s action harmed Plaintiff; and what specific legal right Plaintiff believes each Defendant violated. Failure to timely file an adequate amended complaint may result in dismissal of this case without further warning. IT IS SO ORDERED.

STEPHAN M. VIDMAR United States Magistrate Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Garcia v. City of Carlsbad Board Members, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garcia-v-city-of-carlsbad-board-members-nmd-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack