Wayne Romano Springfield v. Elmwood Men Facility
- Vince Chhabria
- 3:23-cv-03325
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Wayne Romano Springfield v. Elmwood Men Facility, Judge Illman dismissed the filing with leave to amend and ordered a second amended complaint within 28 days.
Wayne Romano Springfield must file a second amended complaint within 28 days and follow the court's instructions; the defendants and any claims not included in that complaint will be dismissed.
What happened
Wayne Romano Springfield, a former detainee representing himself, filed a civil-rights complaint under a federal law that allows claims against people who violate constitutional rights. The court had already dismissed his earlier complaints with permission to amend because his allegations were difficult to understand.
Springfield did not file an amended complaint but submitted a letter. The court treated the letter as an amended complaint and dismissed it with leave to amend. The court gave him 28 days to file a second amended complaint identifying the defendants and explaining how they violated his constitutional rights.
The order requires Springfield to include all claims in the new complaint and warns that claims or defendants left out, or failure to amend on time, may result in dismissal of the case. Judge Robert M. Illman also directed Springfield to keep the court informed of any address change and to follow court orders.
The detailed version
- Wayne Romano Springfield v. Elmwood Men Facility · No. 3:23-cv-03325
- Vince Chhabria
- Dec. 5, 2023
Background
Wayne Romano Springfield, a former detainee proceeding without a lawyer, filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The opinion states that his original complaints had been dismissed with permission to amend, and that he had been instructed to provide specific details. Springfield did not file the requested amended complaint. Instead, he filed a letter.
Ruling
The court treated the letter as an amended complaint and dismissed it with leave to amend. The court did not resolve whether Springfield's constitutional rights were violated. It gave him an opportunity to file a second amended complaint within 28 days of the order.
The second amended complaint must include all allegations and claims Springfield wishes to pursue, identify the defendants, and describe how each defendant allegedly violated his constitutional rights. The court warned that claims or defendants omitted from the second amended complaint will be dismissed. It also stated that failing to amend within the specified time will result in dismissal of the case.
Other instructions
The court directed the clerk to send Springfield a copy of the earlier screening order. It also stated that Springfield is responsible for prosecuting the case, must file a separate notice of any change of address, and must comply with court orders in a timely manner. Failure to do so may result in dismissal for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.