Murphy et al v. Anne Arundel County, Maryland et al

Filing 40

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re Amended Complaint. Signed by Judge Marvin J. Garbis on 8/20/13. (jnls, Deputy Clerk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
DONALD MURPHY, et al.

*

Plaintiffs
vs.

*
*

CIVIL ACTION NO. MJG-12-1533

ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, MD, et al. *
Defendants
*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RE: AMENDED COMPLAINT
The Court has before it [Plaintiffs']1 Motion for Leave to
Amend Complaint to Add a Party Plaintiff [Document 32] and the
materials submitted relating thereto.

The Court finds that a

hearing is unnecessary.
In the motion, Plaintiffs state they seek leave to add a
child, [B.B.], as a party Plaintiff and to correct the spelling
of Defendant Cornwell's name. The Defendants do not object to
the motion.

However, the proffered Amended Complaint [Document

32-4] includes the addition of Sargent Jason Wells as a party
Defendant and allegations relating to him.
In November, 2012, the Court issued a Memorandum and Order
[Document 21] denying a motion filed by Plaintiffs seeking leave
to add Sargent Jason Wells.

The Court stated therein that it

was adopting the statement of Defendants' counsel that:
1

The motion is entitled "Defendants' Motion", an obvious
ministerial error.

If after [taking] Sgt. Wells’ deposition
Plaintiffs believe that they have a good
faith basis to add Sgt. Wells as a
Defendant, they may point out the facts that
support their good faith basis and seek to
add him as a Defendant at that time.

Plaintiffs have not pointed out facts that provide a good
faith basis for adding Sargent Wells as a party Defendant.
Accordingly:
1. [Plaintiffs'] Motion for Leave to Amend
Complaint to Add a Party Plaintiff [Document 32]
is GRANTED IN PART.
2. Plaintiffs may file an Amended Complaint that
adds the four-year-old child of the named
Plaintiffs [identified by her initials] as an
additional Plaintiff and corrects all errors in
spelling Defendant Cornwell's name.
3. Plaintiff shall file an Amended Complaint
consistent with this ruling by August 30, 2013.
4. Inasmuch as the Amended Complaint will not
change the Complaint other than to identify the
new Plaintiff and correct spelling, Defendants'
Answer to Complaint [Document 21] shall be
deemed to respond to the Amended Complaint so
that no further Answer is necessary.

SO ORDERED, this Wednesday, August 20, 2013.

/s/__________
Marvin J. Garbis
United States District Judge

2