Smith et al. v. Health and Environment, Kansas Department of, et al.

Filing 15

ORDER CORRECTING THE FILING OF A SUPPLEMENT TO THE COMPLAINT AND EXTENDING THE TIME PERIOD FOR SERVICE. The clerk's office shall docket Larone Smith's Document No. 13 as a Supplement to the plaintiffs' Complaint (Doc. 1). Plaintiffs shall serve the defendants with the Complaint and Supplement no later than March 31, 2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen M. Humphreys on 2/23/15. Mailed to pro se parties Larone J. Smith and Lamekos Goodwin by regular mail. (sj)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

LARONE J. SMITH and
LAMEKOS GOODWIN,
Plaintiffs,
v.
KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
AND ENVIRONMENT, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 14-2499-EFM

ORDER CORRECTING THE FILING OF A SUPPLEMENT TO THE
COMPLAINT AND EXTENDING THE TIME PERIOD FOR SERVICE
This matter is presented for consideration on February 23, 2015. On January 29,
2015, the court ordered that plaintiffs must file any motion to amend the complaint no
later than February 9. (Order, Doc. 12.) On February 12, plaintiff Larone J. Smith filed a
document entitled “Amended Complaint.”

(Doc. 13.)

However, for the reasons

described below, that document is not a proper amended complaint and the court will
consider Document 13 as a supplement to the plaintiffs’ Complaint (Doc. 1).
First, Document 13 was untimely filed because it was filed after the deadline set in
the January 29 Order and included no explanation for the delay. Additionally, the second
named plaintiff, Lamekos Goodwin, did not sign the document. Because both plaintiffs

proceed pro se, Mr. Smith is not permitted to act as counsel for Mr. Goodwin1 and any
pleading which is intended to represent both parties’ interests must then be signed by
both parties.2 Finally, Document 13 fails to include a heading which properly names the
parties against which plaintiffs make claims.3 Therefore, the court directs the Clerk to
file Document No. 13 as a “Supplement” to plaintiffs’ Complaint.
Plaintiffs’ pursuit of this matter as pro se litigants is not an excuse for failure to
follow the relevant rules. District of Kansas Rule 83.5.4(g) requires that “any party
appearing on his or her own behalf without an attorney is expected to read and be familiar
with the Rules of Practice and Procedure of this court; the relevant Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, . . . and to proceed in accordance with them.” Plaintiffs are encouraged to
review this ruling carefully and to study the guidelines and resource materials for selfrepresented litigants available at http://www.ksd.uscourts.gov/self-representation.

If

plaintiffs have not already done so, they must contact the clerk’s office to obtain a copy
of the Pro Se Guide, in which they will find specific instructions on the filing of
pleadings and how to achieve proper service.
Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), plaintiffs’ time limit for service on defendants expired
on February 3, 2015, which is 120 days after the filing of their complaint. But Rule 4(m)

1

See Yarbary v. Martin, Pringle, Oliver, Wallace & Bauer, L.L.P., No. 12-2773-CM-DJW, 2013
WL 5587842, at *1 (D. Kan. Oct. 10, 2013) (citing Adams ex rel. D.J.W. v. Astrue, 659 F.3d
1297, 1299–1300 (10th Cir.2011)).
2
D. Kan. Rule 5.1(b).
3
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 10 (“Every pleading must have a caption with the court's name, a title, a file
number, and a Rule 7(a) designation. The title of the complaint must name all the parties . . . .”).
See also Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b)(2) (“The rules governing captions and other matters of form in
pleadings apply to motions and other papers.”).
2

requires the court to extend the service period if plaintiffs show good cause for their
failure.4 Here, plaintiffs initiated the action as pro se parties and sought appointment of
counsel on two occasions.5 Because these additional legal proceedings have caused
necessary delay, the court finds good cause for plaintiffs’ failure to timely serve the
defendants and will therefore allow plaintiffs additional time. Plaintiffs must serve all
defendants no later than March 31, 2015.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the clerk’s office shall docket Larone
Smith’s Document No. 13 filed February 12, 2015 as a Supplement to the plaintiffs’
Complaint (Doc. 1).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs shall serve the defendants with the
Complaint and the Supplement no later than March 31, 2015.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated at Wichita, Kansas this 23rd day of February 2015.

s/ Karen M. Humphreys
KAREN M. HUMPHREYS
United States Magistrate Judge

4

Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m). “But if the plaintiff shows good cause for the failure, the court must
extend the time for service for an appropriate period.” (emphasis added)
5
See Motion to Appoint Counsel (Doc. 3), which required supplementation (Docs. 4, 7). See
also Motion to Appoint Counsel (Doc. 11) and Order (Doc. 12).
3