Sladek et al v. Bank of America, N.A. et al
MINUTE ORDER granting 39 Plaintiffs' Motion to Amend Complaint, by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 4/16/2014, and denying as moot 31 Defendant El Paso County's Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint. (cpear) Modified on 4/17/2014 to correct text (cpear).
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 13-cv-03094-PAB-MEH
DIANA SLADEK, and
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.,
ARONOWITZ & MECKLENBURG,
THOMAS MOWLE, and
MERS, a division of MERSCORP,
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on April 16, 2014.
In the interest of justice and having no objection from Defendants, Plaintiffs’ Motion to
Amend Complaint [filed April 15, 2014; docket # 39] is granted as follows. On or before April 21,
2014, Plaintiffs may file the pleading attached to the present motion with the following
modifications: (1) the pleading shall be titled “Second Amended Complaint”; and (2) the pleading
shall comply with D.C. Colo. LCivR 10.1(e) (“All documents shall be double spaced.”).
In light of this order, Defendant El Paso County’s Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint
[filed April 10, 2014; docket #31] is denied as moot with leave to re-file, if Defendant so chooses,
in response to the Second Amended Complaint. See Franklin v. Kansas Dep’t of Corrs., 160 F.
App’x 730, 734 (10th Cir. 2005) (“An amended complaint supersedes the original complaint and
renders the original complaint of no legal effect.”) (citing Miller v. Glanz, 948 F. 2d 1562, 1565
(10th Cir. 1991)); see also Robinson v. Dean Foods Co., No. 08-cv-01186-REB-CBS, 2009 WL
723329, at *4 (D. Colo. Mar. 18, 2009) (citation omitted) (“Generally, when an amended complaint
is filed, the previous complaint is wiped out and the operative complaint is the most recently filed
Defendants shall file an answer or other response to the Second Amended Complaint in
accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) or with court order, as applicable.
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?