Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Shelby v. Greystar Management Services, L.P.

United States District Court, W.D. Tennessee, Western Division

January 11, 2018

EDWARD LEE SHELBY, Plaintiff,
v.
GREYSTAR MANAGEMENT SERVICES, L.P., Defendant.

          ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT

          CHARMIANE G. CLAXTON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Before the Court is Defendant's Motion for More Definite Statement. (Docket Entry “D.E.” #2, #6, #7). The instant motion was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge for determination. (D.E. #11). For the reasons set forth herein, it is recommended that Defendant's Motion for More Definite Statement be GRANTED.

         I. Background

         On May 9, 2017, Plaintiff Edward Lee Shelby initiated a pro se lawsuit against Defendant Greystar Management Services, L.P. (“Greystar”) in the Circuit Court for the Thirtieth Judicial District at Memphis. He served Greystar with a Summons, one-page Verified Complaint, and the following: a document entitled “Notes to File / Edward Shelby vs. Riverstone Residential”; a document dated December 15, 2014 entitled “Sequence of Events” that details certain events in November and December of 2014; two black-and-white copies of photographs; a State of Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development Separation Notice dated December with partially illegible decision dates; the first page of a February 13, 2015 letter from the Memphis District Office of Greystar to William P. Brown; and, a Notice to Parties Filing Pro Se from the Circuit Court of Tennessee for the Thirtieth Judicial District at Memphis. The Verified Complaint sets forth, in pertinent part, as follows:

3. On November 24, 2014 at approximately 3:30 P.M., I was called on my cell phone by Akela, the office clerk[, ] to report to LaTonya Richardson, Apartment Manager. I reported at 4:00 P.M. Ms. Richardson reported to me that Brenna in Office Sales had reported that I had called her at 11:00 P.M. the previous night regarding “some keys.” She accused me of sexual harassment and stated she had already called the District Office, gave me a typed letter and stated that I would be on [administrative] leave with pay until the investigation was completed. She stated that I would be contacted and would be able to give a response. I asked for a copy of the charges. This was denied.
4. On December 9, 2014, I received a call to return to my uniforms[, ] and I was relieved of duty.
5. I never received a Dispute Resolution Plan and Mutual Arbitration Agreement.
6. I was falsely accused of sexual harassment
7. Loss [sic] wages
8. Defamation of character
9. By reason of the facts and circumstances stated above, Plaintiff has been damaged by the defendant in the sum of $250, 000.

(Verified Compl. at 1).

         On September 6, 2017, Defendant removed the case to this Court. (D.E. #1). On that same day, Defendant filed the instant Motion for More Definite Statement. Relying upon Plaintiff's state court filings and Rules 8(a)(2) and 12(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant asserts that Plaintiff's Verified Complaint is so vague or ambiguous that it cannot reasonably prepare a response thereto. Specifically, Defendant argues that Plaintiff “merely describes a short conversation between him and a manager” and “summarily concluded that he has suffered a false accusation of sexual harassment, defamation of character, and is entitled to lost wages. Defendant further states that it is unclear whether the remaining documents constitute part of Plaintiff's Complaint to which a response may be required and that the documents themselves are “incomprehensible and conclusory” and do not articulate which events, if any, Plaintiff deems that involve Defendant committing a legal violation giving rise to a cause of action. Accordingly, Defendant requests that the Court instruct Plaintiff to file an Amended Complaint stating with clarity the following: (1) what is the alleged wrongful conduct; (2) what are the precise legal claims sought to be asserted; and, (3) the factual details concerning the above.

         II. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.