Mitchell v. Saint Louis County, Missouri

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION JUAN MITCHELL, individually and on behalf _ ) of Jovan Mitchell, deceased, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) VS. ) Case No. 4:23-cv-00223-MTS ) SAINT LOUIS COUNTY, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on review of Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint, Doc. [34]. When the Court granted Plaintiff leave to file the Second Amended Complaint, the Court ordered Plaintiff to “ensure [that] each count under § 1983 identifie[d] the specific constitutional right allegedly infringed.” Doc. [33] at 2. Plaintiff failed to do so.' Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, no later than Monday, July 17, 2023, Plaintiff shall file a Third Amended Complaint consistent with the Court’s Memorandum and Order dated June 27, 2023, Doc. [33]. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants shall file any required responses to Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint no later than twenty-one (21) days after its filing. Dated this 13th day of July 2023. (|) fe Win tHEW T. SCHELP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

' For example, Count I still cites no constitutional provision whatsoever. It refers only generally to Plaintiff's “Constitutional rights” or his “privileges and immunities.” Doc. [34] 99] 172, 177. In this way, Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint continues to “shif[t] ‘the burden of identifying the plaintiff's genuine claims and determining which of those claims might have legal support’” onto the Defendants and the Court. Harper v. Ascension Health All., 4:17-cv-02495-ERW, 2017 WL 6407776, at *2 (E.D. Mo. Dec. 15, 2017) (quoting Gurman v. Metro Housing & Redevelopment Auth., 842 F. Supp. 2d 1151, 1153 (D. Minn. 2011)).