ALLS v. JACKSON ET AL

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
MACON DIVISION
LEVON ALLS, 	)
)
Plaintiff, 	)
)
v. 	) 	CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:25-cv-461 (MTT)
)
CAPTAIN JACKSON, et al., 	)
)
Defendants. 	)
__________________ 	)
ORDER
Defendants move for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. ECF 52. In an effort to afford the Plaintiff, who is
proceeding pro se, adequate notice and time to respond to Defendants’ motion, the
following notice is given. If Plaintiff wishes to respond, he must do so no later than
TWENTY-ONE DAYS from the receipt of this Order.1
The Court evaluates a motion for judgment on the pleadings 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
1 The Clerk is DIRECTED to mail a copy of the motion for judgment on the pleadings (ECF 52; 52-1) to
Plaintiff at his last known address. Thereafter, all notices or other papers may be served on Plaintiff
directly by mail at his last known address.
Case 5:25-cv-00461-MTT Document 55 Filed 08/07/26 Page 1 of 3

-2-
pleadings is governed 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. See Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384, 387 (2007). “All constitutional claims
Case 5:25-cv-00461-MTT Document 55 Filed 08/07/26 Page 2 of 3

-3-
brought 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 Plaintiff does not timely respond to the motion, the Court may dismiss his
claims against Defendants. Under the procedures and policies of this Court, motions for
judgment on the pleadings are normally decided on briefs. Plaintiff may submit his
argument to this Court by filing a brief in opposition to Defendants’ 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 7th day of August, 2026.
S/ Marc T. Treadwell
MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Case 5:25-cv-00461-MTT Document 55 Filed 08/07/26 Page 3 of 3