Matthew F. Ross v. Turquoise Bay Resort LLC and Robert Ryan Knight

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION MATTHEW F. ROSS, Plaintiff, v. Case No.: 2:25-cv-958-SPC-DNF TURQUOISE BAY RESORT LLC and ROBERT RYAN KNIGHT, Defendants. / ORDER This matter comes before the Court after review of the Supplemental Complaint. (Doc. 5). Because the complaint is a shotgun pleading, the Court dismisses it without prejudice and with leave to amend.

Federal Rule 8 requires “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). Shotgun pleadings violate this rule “by fail[ing] . . . to give the defendant adequate notice of the claims against them and the grounds upon which each claim rests.” Weiland v. Palm City Beach Cnty. Sheriff’s Office, 792 F.3d 1316, 1321– (11th Cir. 2015) (defining the four types of shotgun pleadings).

The complaint is a shotgun pleading because it contains “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.” Id. In each count, Plaintiff Matthew F.

Ross “repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation contained above as if fully set forth herein.” (See, e.g., Doc. 5 ¶¶ 17, 22, 28). Plaintiff must incorporate or separately allege under each count only the facts that are relevant to that count.

Additionally, Plaintiff has requested that the Court award “Plaintiffs and the other members of the Class pre-judgment and post-judgment interest[.]” (Id. at 7). But there is only one plaintiff, and this is not a putative class action. Accordingly, Plaintiff should correct his Prayer for Relief so it is consistent with the parties in this case.

In non-merits dismissals on shotgun pleading grounds, the Eleventh Circuit requires district courts to allow a litigant one chance to remedy such deficiencies. See, e.g., Wagner v. First Horizon Pharm. Corp., 464 F.3d 1273, 1280 (11th Cir. 2006). This is Plaintiff’s chance.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED: (1) The Supplemental Complaint (Doc. 5) is DISMISSED without prejudice. (2) On or before January 20, 2026, Plaintiff must file an amended complaint that corrects the deficiencies outlined above. Failure to comply may result in the Court dismissing and closing this case without further notice.

DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on January 6, 2026.

, tite WObLatrat he 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies: All Parties of Record