SCARDINO
v.
SOUTHERN-OWNERS INSURANCE COMPANY
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.
Plaintiff filed suit against multiple defendants including 20 unidentified fictitious parties named only as "John Does," "Jane Does," "Black Corporations," and "White Partnerships." The district court issued an order to show cause requiring plaintiff to describe these fictitious defendants with sufficient specificity or face dismissal, as federal rules do not permit fictitious-party pleading without adequate identification.
The court held that fictitious-party pleading is not allowed in federal court unless the plaintiff describes the defendant with sufficient specificity to make the description "at the very worst, surplusage." Because plaintiff offered no description of the unidentified defendants or their connection to the motor vehicle accident claim, the court issued an order to show cause requiring plaintiff to provide adequate identification or face dismissal.
[1] Fictitious-party pleading is not permitted in federal court unless the description of the defendant is sufficiently specific to be considered surplusage.
[2] A plaintiff must provide identifiable information about fictitious defendants to avoid dismissal.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“fictitious-party pleading is not allowed in federal court unless a plaintiff describes a defendant with enough specificity to make the description "at the very worst, surplusage."”
Establishes the governing legal standard for permitting fictitious parties in federal court
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff brought claims related to an alleged motor vehicle accident against Southern-Owners Insurance Company and twenty unidentified defendants. Th…
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 Fictitious Party Pleading cases and more on FLexlaw
Plaintiff purports to bring claims against twenty unidentified defendants named "John Does 1-5, Jane Does 105, Black Corporations 1-5, and White Partnerships 1- 5." (Dkt. 1-3 at 6.) However, fictitious-party pleading is not allowed in federal court unless a plaintiff describes a defendant with enough specificity to make the description "at the very worst, surplusage.” Richardson v. Johnson, 598 F. 3d 734, 738 (11th Cir. 2010) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); see Kabbaj v. John Does 1-10, 600 F. App'x 638, 641 (11th Cir. 2015) (affirming district court's dismissal of John Doe defendants where the plaintiff provided "no identifiable information" about them). Here, Plaintiff offers no description of these unidentified defendants or how they are connected to Plaintiff's alleged motor vehicle accident at issue in this case. (Dkt. 1-3 at 6-7.)
Accordingly, on or before June 24, 2025, Plaintiff SHALL SHOW CAUSE as to why Defendants John Does 1-5, Jane Does 105, Black Corporations 1-5, and White Partnerships 1-5 should not be dismissed from this case. Failure to respond to this order will result in dismissal of these Defendants without further notice.
ORDERED in Orlando, Florida, on June 12, 2025.
JULIE S. SNEED UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record