SHEAN v. HARRIS et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TALLAHASSEE DIVISION
DORA RENEE SHEAN,
Plaintiff,
v. 	Case No.: 4:25cv529-MW/MAF
SHEVAUN HARRIS, et al.,
Defendants.
___________________________/
ORDER ACCEPTING IN PART, REJECTING IN PART, AND
ADOPTING IN PART REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This Court has considered, without hearing, the Magistrate Judge's Second
Report and Recommendation. ECF No. 70. This Court previously permitted Plaintiff
leave to amend her complaint if she, in good faith, could allege facts supporting her
argument that the statute of limitations is tolled for any of her claims. ECF No. 53
at 5. This Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s amended complaint and compared its
factual allegations to the factual allegations included in her original complaint that
this Court previously dismissed. The factual allegations in both pleadings are
essentially the same and do not save Plaintiff’s claims from dismissal based on the
statute of limitations or for the other reasons articulated in the Second Report and
Recommendation. Accordingly, upon consideration, no objections having been filed
by the parties,
Case 4:24-cv-00529-MW-MAF Document 73 Filed 02/20/26 Page 1 of 2

2
IT IS ORDERED:
The report and recommendation, ECF No. 70, is accepted in part, rejected
in part, and adopted in part as this Court’s opinion. The pending motions to
dismiss, ECF Nos. 59, 60, and 66, are GRANTED insofar as Plaintiff has not alleged
facts that would toll the statute of limitations, and thus, her claims are barred by the
statute of limitations. If the statute of limitations were not at issue, Plaintiff’s
amended complaint is also due to be dismissed as a shotgun pleading and for failure
to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The Clerk shall enter judgment
stating, 	“Plaintiff’s 	amended 	complaint, 	ECF 	No. 	58, 	is 	DISMISSED 	with
prejudice as barred by the statute of limitations.”1 The Clerk shall close the file.
SO ORDERED on February 20, 2026.
s/Mark E. Walker
United States District Judge
1 Were this case only subject to dismissal for failure to state a claim, the dismissal would
likely be without prejudice and with leave to amend a second time. However, since the statute of
limitations bars Plaintiff’s claims, the dismissal is with prejudice.
Case 4:24-cv-00529-MW-MAF Document 73 Filed 02/20/26 Page 2 of 2