Darazs v. Brighthaupt et al

Filing 22

ORDER denying without prejudice 20 Motion to Amend/Correct. See ORDER, attached. Signed by Judge Thomas P. Smith on February 5, 2013. (Pylman, J.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

CHRISTOPHER MIKE DARAZS,
Plaintiff,

:
:
:
:
:
:
:

v.
JON BRIGHTHAUPT, et al.,
Defendants.

CASE NO. 3:11-cv-2019(AVC)

RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO AMEND
The plaintiff seeks leave to file an amended complaint.

He

states that he wants to add claims and supplement the factual
allegations of the current claims.
Although the plaintiff refers to an amended complaint, he has
not submitted a proper amended complaint with his motion.
amended

complaint

Therefore,

the

completely

amended

replaces

complaint

allegations and all claims.

must

the

prior

include

An

complaint.
all

factual

See International Controls Corp. v.

Vesco, 556 F.2d 665, 668 (2d Cir. 1977) (holding that the amended
complaint completely replaces original complaint), cert. denied,
434

U.S.

1014

(1978).

The

few

paragraphs

submitted

by

the

plaintiff are insufficient to enable the court to consider his
request to amend.
The plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend [Doc. #20] is DENIED
without

prejudice.

The

plaintiff

may

re-file

his

motion

accompanied by a proper amended complaint which includes all claims
he

intends

to

pursue

in

this

action

with

specific

factual

allegations describing how each defendant participated in the
events underlying his claims. All defendants must be listed in the
caption.

The Clerk is directed to send the plaintiff an amended

complaint form with this order.
SO ORDERED at Hartford, Connecticut this

5th

day of

February 2013.

/s/ Thomas P. Smith
THOMAS P. SMITH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2