UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

TEARAH STEWART,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:25-cv-1389-TJC-MCR

BARE ASSETS, INC. and THOMAS HARVEY SHUMAN, II,

Defendants.

ORDER This case is before the Court on review of Plaintiff’s complaint. (Doc. 1). The complaint is due to be dismissed as a shotgun pleading. There are four types of shotgun pleadings: [1] The most common type—by a long shot—is a complaint containing multiple counts where each count adopts the allegations of all preceding counts, causing each successive count to carry all that came before and the last count to be a combination of the entire complaint. [2] The next most common type . . . is a complaint that . . . is guilty of the venial sin of being replete with conclusory, vague, and immaterial facts not obviously connected to any particular cause of action. [3] The third type of shotgun pleading is one that commits the sin of not separating into a different count each cause of action or claim for relief. [4] Fourth, and finally, there is the relatively rare sin of asserting multiple claims against multiple defendants without specifying which of the defendants are responsible for which acts or omissions, or which of the defendants the claim is brought against. Weiland v. Palm Beach Cnty. Sheriff’s Off.,

, 1321–23 (11th Cir. 2015) (footnotes omitted). Plaintiff’s complaint constitutes a “type one” shotgun pleading because each count incorporates the allegations of all preceding counts. Plaintiff must amend the complaint to incorporate the appropriate factual allegations into each count. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED: 1. The Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice. 2. No later than December 12, 2025, Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint addressing the issues identified in this Order. DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida, the 20th day of November, 2025.

OY □ Cimotbeg g. Corrig on TIMOTHY J. CORRIGAN a Senior United States District Judge

hms Copies: Counsel of record