Eller v. Tonche et al

Filing 24

MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice 22 Motion to Amend Complaint, by Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty on 1/12/2016.(slibi, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 15-cv-02693-REB-MEH
WILLIAM B. ELLER,
Plaintiff,
v.
MR. TOUCHE,
MRS. RUCH,
MRS. PARK,
MRS. TAVNER,
MR. LEFEVER,
MR. RUSSELL,
SARAH DARULA, and
NICOLE ALBRIGHT,
Defendants.

MINUTE ORDER
Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on January 12, 2016.
Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Complaint [filed January 8, 2016; docket #22] is denied
without prejudice. Because an amended complaint takes the place of a complaint, the Court will
not allow Plaintiff to file what essentially amounts to two complaints he asks the Court to consider
together. See Franklin v. Kansas Dep’t of Corr., 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 version.”). Thus, should Plaintiff wish to add
parties, he must file an amended complaint that restates all his claims and names all parties,
including those formerly named and those he now wishes to add.