FAIRCLOTH v. SIMMONS et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
MACON DIVISION
STEVEN TODD FAIRCLOTH, 	)
)
)
Plaintiff, 	)
)
v. 	) 	CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:25-CV-439 (MTT)
)
DEPUTY PAUL SIMMONS, 	)
)
Defendant. 	)
)
ORDER
Defendant Deputy Paul Simmons of the Houston County Sheriff’s Office moves
for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. In an effort to afford the Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, adequate notice
and time to respond to the defendant’s motion, the following notice is given. If the
Plaintiff wishes to respond, he must do so no later than TWENTY-ONE DAYS from the
receipt of this Order.
The Court evaluates a motion for judgment on the pleadings for failure to comply
with the applicable statute of limitations using the following standards. Pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c), “[a]fter the pleadings are closed—but early
enough not to delay trial—a party may move for judgment on the pleadings.” “Judgment
on the pleadings is appropriate when there are no material facts in dispute and the
moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Douglas Asphalt Co. v. Qore,
Inc., 541 F.3d 1269, 1273 (11th Cir. 2008) (citing Cannon v. City of W. Palm Beach, 250
F.3d 1299, 1301 (11th Cir. 2001)). A motion for judgment on the pleadings is governed
Case 5:25-cv-00439-MTT Document 22 Filed 06/29/26 Page 1 of 3

-2-
by the same standard as a Rule 12(b)(6) motion. See Mergens v. Dreyfoos, 166 F.3d
1114, 1117 (11th Cir. 1999).
To avoid dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), and
therefore also a Rule 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings, a complaint must
contain sufficient factual matter “to ‘state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.’”
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550
U.S. 544, 570 (2007)). At the motion to dismiss stage, “all well-pleaded facts are
accepted as true, and the reasonable inferences therefrom are construed in the light
most favorable to the plaintiff.” FindWhat Inv’r Grp. v. FindWhat.com, 658 F.3d 1282,
1296 (11th Cir. 2011) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). But “conclusory
allegations, unwarranted deductions of facts or legal conclusions masquerading as facts
will not prevent dismissal.” Wiersum v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 785 F.3d 483, 485 (11th Cir.
2015) (cleaned up). Where there are dispositive issues of law, a court may dismiss a
claim regardless of the factual allegations. Patel v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC,
904 F.3d 1314, 1321 (11th Cir. 2018).
Dismissal on statute-of-limitations grounds is “‘appropriate only if it is apparent
from the face of the complaint that the claim is time-barred’ and ‘only if it appears
beyond a doubt that [a plaintiff] can prove no set of facts that toll the statute.’” Sec'y of
Lab. v. Labbe, 319 F. App'x 761, 764 (11th Cir. 2008) (quoting Tello v. Dean Witter
Reynolds, Inc., 410 F.3d 1275, 1288 n.13 (11th Cir. 2005), overruled on other grounds
by Merck & Co., Inc. v. Reynolds, 559 U.S. 633 (2010). Because § 1983 does not
provide a statute of limitations, courts look to state law to determine when a claim must
be brought. Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384, 387 (2007). “All constitutional claims brought
Case 5:25-cv-00439-MTT Document 22 Filed 06/29/26 Page 2 of 3

-3-
under § 1983 are tort actions, subject to the statute of limitations governing personal
injury actions in the state where the § 1983 action has been brought.” McNair v. Allen,
515 F.3d 1168, 1173 (11th Cir. 2008). Georgia has a two-year statute of limitations for
personal injury and wrongful death actions. See O.C.G.A. § 9-3-33.
If the Plaintiff does not timely respond to the motion to dismiss, the Court may
dismiss his claims against the defendant. Under the procedures and policies of this
Court, motions to dismiss are normally decided on briefs. The Plaintiff may submit his
argument to this Court by filing a brief in opposition to the defendant’s motion. Unless
the Court has granted prior permission, any brief should not exceed 20 pages. M.D. Ga.
L.R. 7.4.
SO ORDERED, this 29th day of June, 2026.
S/ Marc T. Treadwell
MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Case 5:25-cv-00439-MTT Document 22 Filed 06/29/26 Page 3 of 3