Gerald Alexander v. Crystal A. Bradshaw, et al, No. 14-13300 (11th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 14-13300 Date Filed: 04/24/2015 Page: 1 of 3 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 14-13300 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:14-cv-20705-UU GERALD ALEXANDER, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus CRYSTAL A. BRADSHAW, Property Room Employee, COLONEL DAVID MCCARTER, R. DYKES, Assistant Warden, Defendants-Appellees. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________ (April 24, 2015) Case: 14-13300 Date Filed: 04/24/2015 Page: 2 of 3 Before JORDAN, JILL PRYOR, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Gerald Alexander, a prisoner proceeding pro se, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint for failure to state a claim for relief. On appeal, Alexander argues that the district court should not have dismissed his complaint without giving him leave to amend to state a constitutional claim. Alexander asserts that, if given the opportunity to amend the complaint, he would have been able to establish that the defendants were deliberately indifferent and violated his Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. We review a district court’s decision to grant or deny leave to amend for an abuse of discretion. Hollywood Mobile Estates Ltd. v. Seminole Tribe of Fla., 641 F.3d 1259, 1264 (11th Cir. 2011). We have held that, where a more carefully drafted complaint might state a claim, the plaintiff must be given at least one opportunity to amend the complaint before the action is dismissed with prejudice. Bank v. Pitt, 928 F.2d 1108, 1112 (11th Cir. 1991), overruled in part by Wagner v. Daewoo Heavy Indus. Am. Corp., 314 F.3d 541, 542 (11th Cir. 2002) (en banc). Here, however, the district court dismissed the case without prejudice. Where an action is dismissed without prejudice, the plaintiff may refile before the expiration of the applicable statute of limitations. Given that Alexander may refile his case within the statute of 2 Case: 14-13300 Date Filed: 04/24/2015 Page: 3 of 3 limitations, the Court cannot say the district court abused its discretion by denying leave to amend and dismissing the case without prejudice. AFFIRMED. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
