WILLI ANNE ETIENNE
v.
REKA BEANE ET AL.
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.
Pro se plaintiff Willi Anne Etienne appealed a magistrate judge's recommendation to dismiss her complaint for failure to state a claim. The district court adopted the recommendation, finding the amended complaint lacked sufficient factual allegations, failed to establish federal jurisdiction, and did not follow the magistrate judge's instructions for amendment.
The district court affirmed the magistrate judge's recommendation and dismissed the action without prejudice, finding that the Amended Complaint contains insufficient facts to support the allegations, fails to state a plausible claim, and does not establish federal jurisdiction.
[1] Federal courts have an independent obligation to determine whether subject-matter jurisdiction exists, even if not challenged by the parties.
[2] A court must dismiss a case upon concluding that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction.
Previewing 2 of 6 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“There are insufficient facts in the Amended Complaint to support the allegations. No plausible claim has been properly alleged. No federal jurisdiction has been established.”
The court's primary basis for upholding the dismissal: lack of sufficient factual support, failure to plead plausible claims, and absence of federal jurisdiction.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Willi Anne Etienne, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint against defendants including Reka Beane. A magistrate judge issued a Report and Rec…
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 State Law Claims cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE has come before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Jared Strauss (DE [8]). Judge Strauss issued a Report and Recommendation (DE [8]) on October 15, 2025, recommending that the Complaint be dismissed for several reasons which include the fact that Plaintiff, pro se, has failed to state a claim on which relief may be granted. Judge Strauss gave Plaintiff clear instructions as to the deficiencies of her Complaint, and an opportunity to amend the Complaint, as well as instructions on proceeding in forma pauperis or paying a filing fee. Plaintiff did file an Amended Complaint (DE [6]) but in that pleading not only failed to follow Judge Strauss' well-articulated instructions, but also made the Complaint worse. The Amended Complaint named additional defendants, attempted to bring a state lawbased conversion claim, and now alleged diversity jurisdiction without alleging citizenship of the individual defendants. This may be because the original Complaint alleged that both Plaintiff and the individual Defendant were Florida citizens and therefore not diverse.
In any case, this Court has reviewed the entire file and record and has made a de novo review of the issues. There are insufficient facts in the Amended Complaint to support the allegations. No plausible claim has been properly alleged. No federal jurisdiction has been established. And no objections to the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation have been filed. Thus, it is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation (DE [6]) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. This action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case and DENY AS MOOT any pending motions.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 30th day of October 2025.
RAAG SINGHAL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies furnished counsel via CM/ECF and via U.S. Mail to:
Willianne Etienne 6232 NW 36th Avenue Coconut Creek, FL 33073
2