VICE v. ARAMARK CORPORATION et al

Page 1 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PENSACOLA DIVISION
THOMAS JOHN VICE,
Plaintiff,
v. 	Case No. 3:25cv2303-LC-HTC
ARAMARK CORP., et al.,
Defendants.
_____________________/
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff Thomas John Vice, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a
civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging Defendants failed to ensure
a safe work environment that resulted in his back injury. Doc. 1. Upon review, the
undersigned 	finds the case should be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE
because Vice failed to truthfully disclose his litigation history on the complaint form.
This Court’s Local Rules require prisoners and pro se litigants to use the
Court’s complaint form when filing a civil rights complaint. 	See N.D. Fla. Loc. R.
5.7(A). Included in the form1 is a section which required Vice to disclose his prior
litigation history,2 including “any other lawsuit, habeas corpus petition, or appeal in
1 It appears that rather than using the Court’s form, Vice reproduced the form but failed to include
the section numbers.
2 The questions in this section serve several purposes, including assisting the Court in identifying
cases that qualify as strikes under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), cases that are related or duplicative, and in
Case 3:25-cv-02303-LC-HTC Document 6 Filed 12/11/25 Page 1 of 4

Page 2 of 4
Case No. 3:25cv2303-LC-HTC
state or federal court either challenging [his] conviction or relating to the conditions
of [his] confinement.” 	Doc. 1 at 7-8 (emphasis in original). 	The complaint form
warns plaintiffs that “failure to disclose all prior state and federal cases—
including, but not limited to civil cases, habeas cases, and appeals—may result
in the dismissal of this case.” 	Doc. 1 at 6 (emphasis in original). 	Moreover, the
complaint form advises plaintiffs to “err on the side of caution” if they are uncertain
about whether a case should be identified. Id.
Despite signing the complaint under “penalty of perjury, that all of the
information … included on or with [the] form, including [his] litigation history, is
true and correct,” (Doc. 1 at 8) (emphasis in original), the Court takes judicial notice
that Vice failed to include at least the following cases: (1) Thomas John Vice v. State
of Florida, Case No. 6D2024-1346 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Aug. 5, 2025) (challenging
his criminal conviction) and (2) Thomas John Vice v. Sec’y, Dep’t of Corr., Case No.
8:25cv2647/WFJ/AAS (M.D. Fla. Oct. 15, 2025) (a pending habeas petition
challenging his conviction).
The Court has the inherent power to dismiss a complaint for failure to disclose
even a single case. 	See McNair v. Johnson, 143 F.4th 1301 (11th Cir. 2025)
(recognizing court’s inherent authority to dismiss an action for failure to truthfully
gauging a plaintiff’s litigation experience. 	See Jacobs v. Comerford, 2013 WL 6184052 at * 4
(N.D. Fla. Nov. 25, 2013).
Case 3:25-cv-02303-LC-HTC Document 6 Filed 12/11/25 Page 2 of 4

Page 3 of 4
Case No. 3:25cv2303-LC-HTC
disclose litigation history when requested to do so on complaint form). It also has
the inherent power to dismiss based on a failure to comply with orders of the Court,
this Court’s local rules, or for abusing the judicial process. Id. at 1308; see also N.D.
Fla. Loc. R. 41.1 (“If a party fails to comply with an applicable rule or a court order,
the Court may strike a pleading, dismiss a claim, enter a default on a claim, take
other appropriate action, or issue an order to show cause why any of these actions
should not be taken.”).
Thus, an appropriate sanction for Vice’s failure to provide the Court with true
factual responses is to dismiss this case without prejudice. 	See Bratton v. Sec’y
DOC, 2012 WL 2913171, at *1 (M.D. Fla. July 16, 2012) (dismissing case without
prejudice when prisoner failed to disclose one prior federal case that was dismissed
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)); Johnson v. Crawson, No. 5:08cv300/RS/EMT, 2010
WL 1380247, at *2 (N.D. Fla. Mar. 3, 2010) (same); see also Strickland v. United
States, 739 F. App’x 587, 588 (11th Cir. 2018) (“A sanction less than dismissal would
signal that a failure to disclose filings is an infraction without consequence.”). “If
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 information could be provided with no
effective sanction, the form would serve little purpose.” 	Rodriguez v. Inch, No.
4:19cv191-RH-HTC, Doc. 52 (N.D. Fla. June 7, 2020). Because this is a dismissal
Case 3:25-cv-02303-LC-HTC Document 6 Filed 12/11/25 Page 3 of 4

Page 4 of 4
Case No. 3:25cv2303-LC-HTC
without prejudice, Vice may initiate a new suit on these claims, provided he does so
within the statute of limitations period.
Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that:
1. 	This case be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE under this Court’s
inherent power for Vice’s failure to fully disclose his litigation history.
2. 	The clerk be directed to close the file.
At Pensacola, Florida, this 11 th day of December, 2025.
/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 3:25-cv-02303-LC-HTC Document 6 Filed 12/11/25 Page 4 of 4