Hoggard v. Page et al

Filing 30

ORDER granting 7 Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint. Denying without prejudice 15 Defendant's Supplemental Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Judge James M. Moody Jr. on 2/16/2016. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION
NATHAN HOGGARD
vs.

PLAINTIFF
No. 3:15-cv-323 JM

ROGER PAGE, ET AL.

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

Pending are Plaintiff’s second Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint (Docket No.
7) and Defendants’ Supplemental Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 15)1. Both motions have been
responded to, and replies have been filed. For the reasons stated below, the Court will give
Plaintiff leave to amend a second, and final, time and will deny Defendants’ motion to dismiss
without prejudice.
Regarding Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a second amended complaint, the Court is
guided by the language of Rule 15(a)(2) that requires a court to “freely give leave [to amend]
when justice so requires.” In circumstances showing “undue delay, bad faith on the part of the
moving party, futility of the amendment or unfair prejudice to the opposing party,” denial of
leave to amend may be justified. Crest Const. II, Inc. v. Doe, 660 F.3d 346, 358-59 (8th Cir.
2011) (internal citations omitted). The Court finds that none of those factors are present in this
case. A final scheduling order was only entered on January 8, 2016, and the Court believes
Defendants’ arguments regarding futility of amendment would be better and more fully
addressed in a motion to dismiss the second amended complaint or in a motion for summary
judgment. Therefore, Plaintiff is given leave to amend his complaint a final time. However, the
amended complaint must comply with Local Rule 5.5(e), which provides that “[a]ny amendment

1

This is the first motion to dismiss that Defendants have filed other than first asserting these defenses in their
answers.

to a pleading, whether filed as a matter of course or upon a motion to amend, must, except by
leave of Court, reproduce the entire pleading as amended, and may not incorporate any prior
pleading by reference.” Plaintiff has until February 22, 2016 to file his amended and substituted
complaint.
In light of the leave being given to Plaintiff to amend, Defendants’ motion to dismiss is
denied at this time without prejudice. The Court notes that Defendants attached exhibits to their
motion to dismiss; if Defendants intend to rely on matters outside the pleadings in any future
motion, it will be treated as a motion for summary judgment. Fed. R. Civ P. 12(d).
For these reasons, Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint (Docket No.
7) is GRANTED, and Defendants’ Supplemental Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 15) is DENIED
without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 16th day of February, 2016.

______________________________
James M. Moody Jr.
United States District Judge