Thompson v. Gatlin, 272.

• Citation: 58 F. 534
• Decision Date: 16 October 1893
• Docket Number: 272.
• Parties: THOMPSON v. GATLIN et al.
• Court: United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)

58 F. 534

THOMPSON v. GATLIN et al.

No. 272.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

October 16, 1893

Plaintiff's refusal to comply with an order requiring him to separately paragraph his different causes of action, according to the local practice, justifies a dismissal of his case.

Statement by CALDWELL, Circuit Judge:

This suit was brought by Brutus E. Thompson, the plaintiff in error, against W. L. Gatlin and others, the defendants in error, in the United States court in the Indian Territory. The complaint alleged that the defendants wrongfully and maliciously instituted in the United States court in the Indian Territory an action of forcible entry and detainer against the plaintiff to recover the possession of 200 acres of land and the houses and other improvements thereon, and that in pursuance to the command of a writ of possession issued in the cause, the plaintiff was ejected from the premises, and the possession of the same delivered to the defendants in this suit, who wantonly and maliciously cut and tore down and damaged the fences, houses, and other improvements on the land, and destroyed a crop of cotton and broom corn by turning stock in upon the same. It is further averred in the complaint that the plaintiff, to the knowledge of the defendants, was without means to procure another home or shelter for himself and family, and that by reason of the exposure and hardship brought about by his wrongful expulsion from the premises his wife was made sick and suffered a miscarriage. It is averred that the defendants 'unlawfully, wrongfully, and maliciously conspired together to deprive this plaintiff of the possession of his home and said two hundred acre tract of land and the improvements and crops thereon,' and that the destruction of the improvements and crops on the land and the exposure of himself and family 'was the direct result and purpose of such conspiracy, and that plaintiff was actually damaged by the said destruction of said fences, houses, and other improvements and of said crops of cotton and broom corn to the amount of $2,089.25, a recovery for which said damages however, is not asked in this suit; and that by reason of the plaintiff being deprived of the possession of said two hundred acre tract of land from the said ___ day of July, 1891, to the said ___ day of April, 1892, plaintiff suffered actual damages in the sum of four hundred and fifty dollars; and that by reason of his being deprived of the right to maintain his residence in the house upon said two hundred acre tract of land, and of the consequent suffering of himself and family, he has sustained actual damages in the sum of ten thousand dollars.' The alleged wrongful and malicious acts of the defendants are again recapitulated and a claim made for 'further damages in the sum of ten thousand dollars as exemplary damages,' and the complaint concludes by praying judgment for $20,450. All these claims are stated as one cause of action, and in a single paragraph. The complaint does not allege want of probable cause for bringing the action of forcible entry and detainer, or that that action was terminated in favor of this plaintiff. The court, on motion of the defendants, required the plaintiff to paragraph his complaint. The plaintiff refused to comply with this order, whereupon the court dismissed his action, for that reason, and this ruling is assigned for error.

Clifford L. Jackson, for plaintiff in error.

W. T Hutchings, for defendants in error.

Before CALDWELL and SANBORN, Circuit Judges, and THAYER, District Judge.

CALDWELL Circuit Judge, after stating the facts as above, ....