PADGETT
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Court held that its prior order striking the complaint and setting a deadline for amendment became a final judgment when the plaintiff failed to comply.
The Court had previously struck the plaintiff's complaint and ordered him to file a new one by a specific date. The plaintiff failed to file a new com…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Extension Of Time cases and more on FLexlaw
On September 13, 2022, the Court entered an Order, (Doc. 8), striking Logan T. Padgett’s Complaint in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The Court directed Padgett to file a new complaint on or before September 26, 2022. Padgett has not done so
or asked for an extension of time. Accordingly, the Court’s prior Order has become a final judgment, meaning the Court cannot “grant any more extensions’ of time to amend the complaint” and must dismiss the case. See Auto. Alignment & Body Serv., Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 953 F. 3d 707, 719-722 (11th Cir. 2020) (explaining that an “order dismissing a complaint with leave to amend within a specified time becomes a final judgment if the time allowed for amendment expires without the plaintiff seeking an extension” (citing Hertz Corp. v. Alamo Rent-A-Car, Inc., 16 F. 3d 1126 (11th Cir. 1994))).
The Clerk is directed to TERMINATE any pending motions and deadlines, to ENTER judgment in accord with the final order, (Doc. 8), and to CLOSE this case. DONE AND ORDERED at Tampa, Florida, on October 11, 2022.
/s/ William F. Jung