Williams v. The Tommy and Shirley Strickland Cancer Center Inc.

S.D. Georgia

Williams v. The Tommy and Shirley Strickland Cancer Center Inc.

DecidedAugust 9, 2022

Docket6:22-cv-00049

StatusUnknown

This text of Williams v. The Tommy and Shirley Strickland Cancer Center Inc. (Williams v. The Tommy and Shirley Strickland Cancer Center Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Williams v. The Tommy and Shirley Strickland Cancer Center Inc., (S.D. Ga. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA STATESBORO DIVISION MICHAEL DESHAUN WILLIAMS, ) Plaintiff, v. CV 622-049 THE TOMMY AND SHIRLEY STRICKLAND CANCER CENTER INC., ) et. al., ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER

After a careful, de novo review of the file, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, to which objections have been filed. (Doc. no. 8.) In addition to filing objections, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint. (Doc. no. 10.) Although leave to amend under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) is generally given freely, Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962), leave is not guaranteed, and a trial court may deny such leave “in the exercise of its inherent power to manage the conduct of litigation before it.” Reese v. Herbert, 527 F.3d 1253, 1263 (11th Cir. 2008). “In making this determination, a court should consider whether there has been undue delay in filing, bad faith or dilatory motives, prejudice to the opposing parties, and the futility of the amendment.” Saewitz v. Lexington Ins. Co., 133 F. App’x 695, 699 (1 1th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (quoting Foman, 371 U.S. at 182). The Court DENIES leave to file the second amended complaint because permitting amendment based on such a shotgun pleading would be futile. The second amended complaint alleges state law

claims for medical malpractice. Merely listing federal statutes, with no attempt to allege supporting factual details, fails to state a claim or a basis for federal jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's objections, ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as its opinion, DISMISSES this case without prejudice, and CLOSES this civil action. SO ORDERED this Y day of August, 2022, at Augusta, Georgia. ADELE |\Aana CE J. RANBAL-HALY, CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA STATESBORO DIVISION MICHAEL DESHAUN WILLIAMS, ) Plaintiff, v. CV 622-049 THE TOMMY AND SHIRLEY STRICKLAND CANCER CENTER INC., ) et. al., ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER

After a careful, de novo review of the file, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, to which objections have been filed. (Doc. no. 8.) In addition to filing objections, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint. (Doc. no. 10.) Although leave to amend under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) is generally given freely, Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962), leave is not guaranteed, and a trial court may deny such leave “in the exercise of its inherent power to manage the conduct of litigation before it.” Reese v. Herbert, 527 F.3d 1253, 1263 (11th Cir. 2008). “In making this determination, a court should consider whether there has been undue delay in filing, bad faith or dilatory motives, prejudice to the opposing parties, and the futility of the amendment.” Saewitz v. Lexington Ins. Co., 133 F. App’x 695, 699 (1 1th Cir. 2005) (per curiam) (quoting Foman, 371 U.S. at 182). The Court DENIES leave to file the second amended complaint because permitting amendment based on such a shotgun pleading would be futile. The second amended complaint alleges state law

claims for medical malpractice. Merely listing federal statutes, with no attempt to allege supporting factual details, fails to state a claim or a basis for federal jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's objections, ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as its opinion, DISMISSES this case without prejudice, and CLOSES this civil action. SO ORDERED this Y day of August, 2022, at Augusta, Georgia. ADELE |\Aana CE J. RANBAL-HALY, CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Williams v. The Tommy and Shirley Strickland Cancer Center Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-the-tommy-and-shirley-strickland-cancer-center-inc-gasd-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack