Weatherspoon v. Dinsa et al

Filing 121

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S 89 Motion to Amend/Correct - Signed by Magistrate Judge R. Steven Whalen. (CCie)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
MORRIS WEATHERSPOON,
#471817,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-12756
Plaintiff,
DISTRICT JUDGE LAURIE J. MICHELSON
v.
MAGISTRATE JUDGE R. STEVEN WHALEN
SURJIT DINSA, et al.,
Defendants.
_________________________________/
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO AMEND
On July 11, 2014, Plaintiff Morris Weatherspoon, a prison inmate in the custody of
the Michigan Department of Corrections (“MDOC”), filed a pro se civil complaint under
42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical conditions in
violation of the Eighth Amendment. Before the Court is his motion to amend his
complaint [Doc. #89].
Despite the general rule of liberality with which leave to file amended complaints
is to be granted, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a) , the Sixth Circuit has held that when a proposed
amended complaint would not survive a motion to dismiss, the court may properly deny
the amendment. Neighborhood Development Corp. v. Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation, 632 F.2d 21, 23 (6th Cir. 1980); Thiokol Corporation v. Department of
Treasury, 987 F.2d 376 (6th Cir. 1993).

-1-

Plaintiff seeks to amend his complaint by adding information regarding
Defendants Potts, Conrad, and Jindal. Potts and Conrad, who were allegedly involved in
Plaintiff’s dental care have already been dismissed. I have filed a Report and
Recommendation that Jindal be granted summary judgment. Plaintiff’s requested
amendment would be futile.
Therefore, Plaintiff’s motion to amend [Doc. #89] is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/R. Steven Whalen
R. STEVEN WHALEN
United States Magistrate Judge
Dated: March 1, 2017

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was sent to parties of record on
March 1, 2017, electronically and/or by U.S. mail.
s/Carolyn M. Ciesla
Case Manager

-2-