United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama, 2025

Gregory Kelly and Annette B. Kelly v. Montgomery Real Estate, LLC, d/b/a Rapid...

Gregory Kelly and Annette B. Kelly v. Montgomery Real Estate, LLC, d/b/a Rapid...
United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama · Decided December 15, 2025
Gregory Kelly and Annette B. Kelly v. Montgomery Real Estate, LLC, d/b/a Rapid...

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION

GREGORY KELLY and ) ANNETTE B. KELLY, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. v. ) 2:25cv733-MHT ) (WO) MONTGOMERY REAL ESTATE, ) LLC, d/b/a Rapid Fire Home ) Buyers, and JOSEPH BACK, ) ) Defendants. ) OPINION Plaintiffs Gregory Kelly, a frequent pro se litigant who has been declared a vexatious litigant*, and Anita Kelly, filed pro se a 30-count complaint raising a wide variety of federal and state-law claims against two defendants, a real estate company and an individual. Finding that the complaint was a shotgun pleading, the United States Magistrate Judge ordered them to replead the complaint and provided specific * See Kelly v. Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Bd. of City of Montgomery, 2:24-cv-348-RAH, 2025 WL 1461271 (M.D. Ala. May 21, 2025). instructions on how to do so. Plaintiffs then filed an amended complaint. This case is now before the court on the recommendation of the magistrate judge that plaintiffs’ amended complaint (Doc. 8) be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with court orders and Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with court orders and failure to prosecute. The magistrate judge further recommends that the court enter an order that, as a consequence of Gregory Kelly’s vexatious filing of shotgun pleadings, in the event Gregory Kelly or anyone acting in concert with him files a shotgun complaint in the future, after appropriate review, the court shall summarily dismiss the pleading and the action without prejudice. Also, before the court are plaintiffs’ objections to the recommendation, in which plaintiffs make bizarre, disjointed, and nonsensical representations and arguments. Upon an independent and de novo review of the record, the court concludes that plaintiffs’ objections should be overruled and the recommendation adopted.

An appropriate order and judgment will be entered.

DONE, this the 15th day of December, 2025.

/s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.