Patrick D. Wilson v. C. Stewart and Trine

E.D. Michigan

Patrick D. Wilson v. C. Stewart and Trine

DecidedJanuary 23, 2026

Docket1:25-cv-10483

StatusUnknown

This text of Patrick D. Wilson v. C. Stewart and Trine (Patrick D. Wilson v. C. Stewart and Trine) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Michigan primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Patrick D. Wilson v. C. Stewart and Trine, (E.D. Mich. 2026).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION

PATRICK D. WILSON, Case No. 1:25-cv-10483

Plaintiff, Thomas L. Ludington United States District Judge v. Patricia T. Morris C. STEWART and TRINE, United States Magistrate Judge

Defendants. /

ORDER CONSTRUING PLAINTIFF’S FILING AS A MOTION TO AMEND (ECF No. 28) AND DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE PROPOSED AMENDED COMPLAINT

This is a prisoner civil rights case. Plaintiff filed a document titled “First Supplemental to Add Administrative Assistant Ms. Cavill to the Above Action” on January 21, 2026. (ECF No. 28). Because Plaintiff seeks to add Administrative Assistant Cavill as a defendant, the Court construes the filing as a motion to amend the complaint. The filing, however, consists primarily of argument and additional factual assertions and does not include a proposed amended complaint setting forth all claims Plaintiff seeks to pursue. It is thus in violation of Eastern District of Michgan Local Rule 15.1, which requires that a motion to amend be accompanied by a complete proposed amended pleading. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file a proposed amended complaint on or before February 23, 2026. The proposed amended complaint must

be complete in itself and may not incorporate prior pleadings by reference. General requirements for pleadings follow: First, Plaintiff’s amended complaint must have a caption, stating the Court’s

name (United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, Northern Division), the document title (Amended Complaint), and the case number (1:25- cv-10483). See Robinson v. Fifth Third Bank, No. 1:21-CV-279, 2021 WL 5606972, at *2 (W.D. Mich. May 5, 2021) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a)).

Second, that amended complaint must set out claims for relief. A pleading that states a claim for relief must contain: (1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim needs no new jurisdictional support; (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and (3) a demand for the relief sought, which may include relief in the alternative or different types of relief.

Id. (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)) (emphasis added in Robinson). Third, Plaintiff must set forth the facts supporting his claims for relief in numbered paragraphs with each paragraph “limited as far as practicable to a single set of circumstances.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). Fourth, Plaintiff “must set out the legal or statutory authority for each of h[is] claims.” Robinson, at *2 (emphasis added). Failure to comply with this Order may result in the denial of Plaintiff’s request to amend.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: January 23, 2026 s/ patricia t. morris Patricia T. Morris United States Magistrate Judge

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION

PATRICK D. WILSON, Case No. 1:25-cv-10483

Plaintiff, Thomas L. Ludington United States District Judge v. Patricia T. Morris C. STEWART and TRINE, United States Magistrate Judge

Defendants. /

ORDER CONSTRUING PLAINTIFF’S FILING AS A MOTION TO AMEND (ECF No. 28) AND DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE PROPOSED AMENDED COMPLAINT

This is a prisoner civil rights case. Plaintiff filed a document titled “First Supplemental to Add Administrative Assistant Ms. Cavill to the Above Action” on January 21, 2026. (ECF No. 28). Because Plaintiff seeks to add Administrative Assistant Cavill as a defendant, the Court construes the filing as a motion to amend the complaint. The filing, however, consists primarily of argument and additional factual assertions and does not include a proposed amended complaint setting forth all claims Plaintiff seeks to pursue. It is thus in violation of Eastern District of Michgan Local Rule 15.1, which requires that a motion to amend be accompanied by a complete proposed amended pleading. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file a proposed amended complaint on or before February 23, 2026. The proposed amended complaint must

be complete in itself and may not incorporate prior pleadings by reference. General requirements for pleadings follow: First, Plaintiff’s amended complaint must have a caption, stating the Court’s

name (United States District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, Northern Division), the document title (Amended Complaint), and the case number (1:25- cv-10483). See Robinson v. Fifth Third Bank, No. 1:21-CV-279, 2021 WL 5606972, at *2 (W.D. Mich. May 5, 2021) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(a)).

Second, that amended complaint must set out claims for relief. A pleading that states a claim for relief must contain: (1) a short and plain statement of the grounds for the court’s jurisdiction, unless the court already has jurisdiction and the claim needs no new jurisdictional support; (2) a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief; and (3) a demand for the relief sought, which may include relief in the alternative or different types of relief.

Id. (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)) (emphasis added in Robinson). Third, Plaintiff must set forth the facts supporting his claims for relief in numbered paragraphs with each paragraph “limited as far as practicable to a single set of circumstances.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(b). Fourth, Plaintiff “must set out the legal or statutory authority for each of h[is] claims.” Robinson, at *2 (emphasis added). Failure to comply with this Order may result in the denial of Plaintiff’s request to amend.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Date: January 23, 2026 s/ patricia t. morris Patricia T. Morris United States Magistrate Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Patrick D. Wilson v. C. Stewart and Trine, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patrick-d-wilson-v-c-stewart-and-trine-mied-2026.