[EDRM Editor’s Note: The opinions and positions are those of the author.]
Kelly v. City of Cochran, GA, 2026 WL 125990 (M.D. Ga. May 7, 2026), is generally, but not completely, a run-of-the-mine request to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. §1915.
After finding that the plaintiff lacked sufficient financial resources, the court looked to see whether the Complaint was frivolous. The court wrote that §1915(a) “should not be a broad highway into the federal courts.” Id. at *1 (citation omitted). Mr. Kelly’s 152-page Complaint asserted 26 claims against at least 17 defendants. Id. at *2.
The decision is significant because the Kelly court defined what constitutes a “shotgun” pleading, and (in my opinion) that is not limited to the in forma pauperis context.
The decision is significant because the Kelly court defined what constitutes a “shotgun” pleading, and (in my opinion) that is not limited to the in forma pauperis context.
Michael D. Berman, Owner, E-Discovery LLC.
The “shotgun” pleading analysis began with Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). A complaint must contain “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” The court then explained:
A Shotgun pleading is one that lacks the minimum clarity, brevity, or coherence required by Rules 8 and 10 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure….. There are four main types of shotgun pleadings: (1) a complaint containing multiple counts where each count adopts the allegations of all preceding counts, causing each successive count to carry all that came before and the last count to be a combination of the entire complaint; (2) a complaint that is replete with conclusory, vague, and immaterial facts not obviously connected to any particular cause of action; (3) a complaint that fails to separate into a different count each cause of action or claim for relief and (4) a complaint that asserts multiple claims against multiple defendants without specifying which of the defendants are responsible for which acts or omissions, or which of the defendants the claim is brought against…..
Id. at *3 (emphasis added; cleaned up; quotations, brackets, and citations omitted).
The court concluded that: “Kelly’s complaint has at least two, if not more, characteristics of a shotgun pleading.” Id. Each count was “replete” with immaterial allegations. Material allegations were “buried beneath innumerable pages of rambling irrelevancies.” Id. Among other defects, “Kelly’s statement of facts is around 50 pages long and consists of over 300 factual allegations, many of which have no apparent relevance to Kelly’s claims.” Id. The Complaint was therefore held to be an impermissible shotgun pleading. Id.
The court provided Mr. Kelly the opportunity to replead, after setting out strict contours governing any such effort.
Assisted by GAI and LLM Technologies per EDRM’s GAI and LLM Policy.
