on defendants for other purposes such as demonstrating that Defendants alleged failures were more than mere negligence. 6 .Indeed, the Eleventh Circuit has extended the Eighth Amendment or used its standards to determine when the due process rights of a involuntarily civilly committed person had been violated. See Dolihite, 74 F.3d at 1041; also Spivey, 29 F.3d at 1526 (extending Taylor to create a duty on state officials running a state residential school to protect a deaf student in their care and custody). 7 . Even if Plaintiffs Amended Complaint made allegations that collectively accused all defendants of violating Plaintiff’s constitutional rights (which it does not), Defendants' motions would still not be well taken. See Kyle K. v. Chapman, 208 F.3d 940, 944 (11th Cir.2000)
holding that the complaint did not satisfy the notice pleading requirements of federal rule of civil procedure 8a because the complaint gave the defendants no notice of the specific factual allegations presented for the first time in the plaintiffs opposition to summary judgment holding that there must be a causal connection between the advertising activity and the injury alleged in the underlying complaint holding despite collective allegations in complaint the complaint was not deficient under rule 8a because it stated with sufficient particularity facts establishing a causal connection between the defendants actions and the constitutional deprivation holding that the allegations in the complaint stated a cause of action under section 376313 holding that the plaintiffs complaint was valid because despite general allegations it provided notice