Lagrandeur v. Najjar

CourtDistrict Court, M.D. Florida
DecidedOctober 30, 2024
Docket2:24-cv-00333
StatusUnknown

This text of Lagrandeur v. Najjar (Lagrandeur v. Najjar) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, M.D. Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lagrandeur v. Najjar, (M.D. Fla. 2024).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

JEFFREY LAGRANDEUR,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 2:24-cv-333-SPC-KCD

ANTHONY NAJJAR, N. OLVERA, J.S. ROBERTS and MICHAEL HUGHLEY,

Defendants. / OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion to Revoke Plaintiff’s In Forma Pauperis Status (Doc. 31). The motion alerted the Court to the fact that Plaintiff Jeffrey Lagrandeur misrepresented his litigation history in his Complaint. Magistrate Judge Kyle Dudek reviewed Lagrandeur’s litigation history and ordered Lagrandeur to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for abuse of the judicial process. (See Doc. 36). In response, Lagrandeur acknowledged he made “material misrepresentations” in his complaint and attempted to correct them by listing the cases he initially failed to disclose, including cases dismissed for failure to prosecute and abuse of the judicial process. (Doc. 38 at 3). But he does not adequately explain why he misrepresented his litigation history. The Court finds that Lagrandeur abused the judicial process by misrepresenting his litigation history and thereby avoiding potential dismissal

under the three-strikes rule set out in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Allen v. Clark, 266 F. App’x 815, 817 (11th Cir 2008) (dismissals for failure to prosecute and abuse of the judicial process are considered strikes). The Eleventh Circuit has repeatedly found dismissal appropriate when a prisoner misrepresents his

litigation history. See Redmon v. Lake Cnty. Sheriff’s Off., 414 F. App’x 221, 226 (11th Cir. 2011) (prisoner's failure to disclose a prior lawsuit was an abuse of the judicial process); Shelton v. Rohrs, 406 F. App’x 340, 341 (11th Cir. 2010) (same); and Hood v. Tompkins, 197 F. App’x 818, 819 (11th Cir. 2006) (same).

The Court will thus dismiss this action without prejudice. Lagrandeur may file a new action, but he must either pay the filing fee or establish an exception to the three-strike rule. Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED: Defendants’ Motion to Revoke Plaintiff’s In Forma Pauperis Status (Doc. 31) is GRANTED. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for abuse of the judicial process. The Clerk is DIRECTED to terminate any pending

motions and deadlines, enter judgment, and close this case. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on October 30, 2024.

, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

SA: FTMP-1 Copies: All Parties of Record

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

Related

Paul M. Hood v. Warden Billy Tompkins
197 F. App'x 818 (Eleventh Circuit, 2006)
Clarence Allen v. Howard Clark
266 F. App'x 815 (Eleventh Circuit, 2008)
Matthew Tazio Redmon v. Lake County Sheriff's Office
414 F. App'x 221 (Eleventh Circuit, 2011)
Shelton v. Rohrs
406 F. App'x 340 (Eleventh Circuit, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Lagrandeur v. Najjar, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lagrandeur-v-najjar-flmd-2024.