Savannah-Chatham County Fair Housing Council, Inc. v. Karima Group LLC et al

Filing 41

ORDER dismissing as moot 35 Motion to Amend/Correct; dismissing as moot 36 Motion to Amend/Correct; granting 40 Motion to Amend; dismissing as moot with leave to refile 25 Motion to Dismiss. That plaintiff is directed to file the second amended complaint attached to the joint motion within seven days of the date of this Order. The deadlines in the current Scheduling Order 29 are STAYED for ninety days from the date of this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Christopher L. Ray on 10/15/20. (jrb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SAVANNAH DIVISION
SAVANNAH-CHATHAM FAIR
HOUSING COUNCIL, INC.,
Plaintiff,
v.
KARMINA GROUP, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CV419-352

ORDER
Having considered the parties’ joint motion and stipulation, and
good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
1.

That the joint motion is GRANTED, doc. 40;

2.

That plaintiff’s pending motions to amend the scheduling
order, doc. 35, and for permission to file a second amended
complaint, doc. 36, are withdrawn and DISMISSED as moot;

3.

That plaintiff is directed to file the second amended complaint
attached to the joint motion within seven days of the date of
this Order, doc. 40-1;

4.

That upon filing of the second amended complaint, plaintiff is
directed to effect service on the two newly added defendants—
Carlisle Village Homeowners Association, Inc. and Mark
Crapps, individually and doing business as Groundmark
Design LLC—and file proofs of service as required by Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 4;

5.

6.

That Towne Park 82 LLC remains in this action as a
counterclaimant. Since Towne Park answered jointly with
defendants Karima Group and Carlisle Village and that answer
is vitiated by the amendment, Towne Park is DIRECTED to
file a separate counterclaim within the twenty-one-day period
for filing responsive pleadings, provided above. As discussed
below, that counterclaim will supersede the prior pleading.
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss that counterclaim,
doc. 25, is DISMISSED as moot with leave to refile;

7.

That within seven days of the appearance of the newly added
defendants, plaintiff is DIRECTED to supply each newly
added defendant with a copy of each pleading filed in this
action. Plaintiff is further DIRECTED to file a notice with
the Court indicating its compliance and the manner in which
it provided the pleadings to the newly added defendants;

8.

1

That the two current defendants—Karima Group LLC and
Carlisle Village LLC—shall have 21 days from the date of this
Order 1 to answer or otherwise respond to the second amended
complaint. Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss their counterclaims,
doc. 25, is DISMISSED as moot with leave to refile;

That upon the appearance of the newly added defendants,
plaintiff is DIRECTED to supply each newly added defendant
with a copy of its discovery responses, productions, and
disclosures and current defendants are DIRECTED to supply
each newly added defendant with a copy of their discovery
responses, productions and disclosures. Those materials must
be provided no later than forty-eight hours prior to the
scheduling conference, discussed below;

Given the seven-day period for plaintiff’s filing of the second amended complaint,
the twenty-one-day period ensures that defendants will have, at least, the fourteenday response period provided in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2).

9.

That the deadlines in the current Scheduling Order, doc. 29,
are STAYED for ninety days from the date of this Order; and,

10.

That upon the appearance of the newly added defendants,
plaintiff is DIRECTED to notify the undersigned’s Courtroom
Deputy Clerk of no fewer than three mutually convenient,
proposed dates for conducting a Rule 16 scheduling conference.
If any defendant has not appeared within ninety days of the
date of this Order, all appearing parties are DIRECTED to
confer and propose dates for a scheduling conference.

Upon filing, the second amended complaint will become the
operative pleading, superseding all previous versions of the complaint. See
Malowney v. Fed. Collection Deposit Grp., 193 F.3d 1342, 1345 n. 1 (11th
Cir. 1999) (“An amended complaint supersedes an original complaint”);
Varnes v. Local 91, Glass Bottle Blowers Ass’n of U.S. & Canada, 674 F.2d
1365, 1370 n. 6 (11th Cir. 1982) (“As a general rule, an amended complaint
supersedes and replaces the original complaint unless the amendment
specifically refers to or adopts the earlier pleading.”).

The Clerk is

DIRECTED to amend the docket accordingly.
SO ORDERED, this 15th day of October, 2020.
_______________________________
__________________________
_
_ _
_
CHRISTOPHER L. RAY
HRISTOPHER
RI OPH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA