Edington v. Sammons et al

Filing 9

ORDER denying as moot 4 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. Signed by Judge Billy Roy Wilson on 9/13/2013. (jak)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION PATRICIA JANE EDINGTON VS. PLAINTIFF 3:13-CV-00202-BRW ALEXANDRA EDINGTON SAMMONS and NATHAN SAMMONS DEFENDANTS ORDER Pending is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 4). For the reasons given below, the Motion is DENIED as MOOT. Plaintiff commenced this action in the Circuit Court of Crittenden County, Arkansas.1 Defendants removed the case to federal court and then filed a Motion to Dismiss the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).2 The following day Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint,3 which she could do as a matter of course under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1) -- rendering her initial Complaint without effect.4 Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as MOOT. IT IS SO ORDERED this 13th day of September, 2013. /s/Billy Roy Wilson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1 See Doc. No. 1. 2 Doc. Nos. 1, 4. 3 Doc. No. 8. 4 See In re Wireless Telephone Federal Cost Recovery Fees Litigation, 396 F.3d 922, 928 (8th Cir. 2005) (“It is well-established that an amended complaint supercedes an original complaint and renders the original complaint without legal effect.”).

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?