LADD v. ESCAMBIA COUNTY JAIL

Page 1 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PENSACOLA DIVISION
ANTHONY SAM LADD,
Plaintiff,
v. 	Case No. 3:26cv533-TKW-HTC
ESCAMBIA COUNTY JAIL,
Defendant.
______________________________/
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff Anthony Sam Ladd, a prisoner at Columbia Correctional Institution
Annex proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983
concerning the conditions of his confinement while he was at the Escambia County
Jail. 	Doc. 1. 	After reviewing Ladd’s complaint and litigation history, the
undersigned recommends this case be dismissed without prejudice because Ladd
failed to truthfully disclose his litigation history.
Section VIII.A. of the complaint form, titled “PRIOR LITIGATION,” asks
Ladd to identify any federal cases he previously filed which were dismissed prior to
service or for failure to state a claim. See Doc. 1 at 9. The form specifically advised
Ladd to “err on the side of caution” and warned him that a failure to disclose “all
prior state and federal cases” “may result in a dismissal of this case.” Id. Although
Ladd disclosed three cases, based on an independent investigation, the Court takes
Case 3:26-cv-00533-TKW-HTC Document 5 Filed 02/13/26 Page 1 of 3

Page 2 of 3
Case No. 3:26cv533-TKW-HTC
judicial notice of the following cases filed by Ladd, which were dismissed for failure
to state a claim1: Ladd v. Net Spend, 3:19-cv-04820-LC-HTC (N.D. Fla. Feb. 28,
2020) (dismissed for failure to state a claim)2 and Ladd v. Clarence Mitchell
Courthouse, et al., 1:20-cv-491-CCB (D. Md. 2020) (dismissed for failure to state a
claim). Ladd failed to disclose these cases in response to Question VIII.A.3
Despite these omissions, Ladd signed the complaint “under penalty of perjury,
that all of the information stated above and included on or with this form, including
my litigation history, is true and correct.” 	Id. at 12-13. 	District courts have the
inherent power to dismiss a suit based on a plaintiff’s failure to truthfully disclose
his litigation history. See McNair v. Johnson, 143 F.4th 1301, 1308 (11th Cir. 2025).
As one judge in this District has stated, “[i]f the requirement for prisoner plaintiffs
to disclose their prior lawsuits is to serve its purpose, a plaintiff must provide
accurate information. If word got around the prisons that inaccurate or incomplete
1 This is not intended to be an exhaustive list of unidentified cases because the failure to truthfully
disclose even one case can, and generally does, result in a dismissal.
2 Although the undersigned is not recommending it, the Court could dismiss this action as
malicious because the Court previously dismissed a prior case Plaintiff filed for failure to truthfully
disclose his litigation history and told him he had not disclosed this exact case and that it should
have been disclosed under Section VIII.A. See Ladd v. Abed, 3:25-cv-462-LC-ZCB.
3 Although Ladd did identify a case against “Net Spend” in response to Question III.B., which asks
if plaintiff had filed other lawsuits dealing with the same facts and issues, each question on the
complaint form serves a different purpose and inclusion of a case in response to one question does
not eliminate the plaintiff’s responsibility to identify the case in response to all applicable
questions. 	See Jacobs v. Comerford, 2013 WL 6184052 at *4 (N.D. Fla. Nov. 25, 2013).
Regardless, Ladd stated the disposition of the “Net Spend” case was unknown, even though he had
just received an order from Judge Bolitho identifying the case number and the nature of its
disposition. Id.
Case 3:26-cv-00533-TKW-HTC Document 5 Filed 02/13/26 Page 2 of 3

Page 3 of 3
Case No. 3:26cv533-TKW-HTC
information could be provided with no effective sanction, the form would serve little
purpose.” Rodriguez v. Inch, et al., No. 4:19cv191-RH-HTC, Doc. 52 at 1–2 (N.D.
Fla. June 7, 2020).
Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED:
1. 	That this case be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE under this
Court’s inherent power for Plaintiff’s failure to truthfully disclose his litigation
history.
2. 	That the clerk be directed to close the file.
At Pensacola, Florida, this 13 th day of February, 2026.
/s/ Hope Thai Cannon
HOPE THAI CANNON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
NOTICE TO THE PARTIES
Objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within
fourteen (14) days of the date of the Report and Recommendation. Any different
deadline that may appear on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only
and does not control. An objecting party must serve a copy of its objections upon
all other parties. A party who fails to object to the magistrate judge’s findings or
recommendations contained in a report and recommendation waives the right to
challenge on appeal the district court’s order based on the unobjected-to factual and
legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. Rule 3-1.
Case 3:26-cv-00533-TKW-HTC Document 5 Filed 02/13/26 Page 3 of 3