Bills et al v. Klee

Filing 64

ORDER (1) Terminating Appearance of Pro Bono Counsel for Plaintiff Rickey Bills, (2) Allowing Plaintiff to File a Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint, and (3) Terminating Plaintiff's 57 MOTION to Respond as Moot. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION RICKEY BILLS, Plaintiff, Case No. 15-cv-11414 Hon. Matthew F. Leitman v. DANIEL HEYNS et al. Defendants. _________________________________/ ORDER (1) TERMINATING APPEARANCE OF PRO BONO COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF RICKEY BILLS, (2) ALLOWING PLAINTIFF TO FILE A MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT, AND (3) TERMINATING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO RESPOND (ECF #57) AS MOOT In this prisoner civil rights action, state prisoner Rickey Bills alleges, among other things, that several current and former employees of the Michigan Department of Corrections misappropriated or misapplied funds that were deposited into his prison bank account. (See Amended Complaint, ECF #18.) On May 4, 2017, the Court appointed attorneys Scott Knapp, Nolan Moody, and Samantha Pattwell of the Dickinson Wright law firm as pro bono counsel for Bills. The Court’s intention was that its appointment of Knapp, Moody, and Pattwell would be for the limited purpose of (1) investigating Bills’ claim that an underlying state-court order was denying him access to the courts and (2) exploring whether Bills and the Defendants could reach a sensible resolution to all of Bills’ claims. 1 The Court understands that attorneys Knapp, Moody, and Pattwell have concluded their work, spoken with Bills, and determined that a global resolution of Bills’ claims against Defendants is not possible at this time. The Court therefore TERMINATES the appearances of Knapp, Moody, and Pattwell as Bills’ pro bono counsel in this action because the limited nature of their appointment is now completed. The Court further understands that Bills would like to amend the Amended Complaint to add additional claims against the Defendants. Bills no longer has the right to amend as a matter of course. See Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(1). However, the Court will allow Bills to file a motion for leave to amend within 45 days of the date of this Order. Such a motion shall comply with all applicable rules of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Local Rules of this Court, including Local Rule 15.1, which requires Bills to attach a copy of his proposed Amended Complaint to that motion: A party who moves to amend a pleading shall attach the proposed amended pleading to the motion. Any amendment to a pleading, whether filed as a matter of course or upon a motion to amend, must, except by leave of court, reproduce the entire pleading as amended, and may not incorporate any prior pleading by reference. 2 Finally, the Court TERMINATES Bills’ motion to respond to Defendants’ now-terminated motions to dismiss (ECF #57) as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Matthew F. Leitman MATTHEW F. LEITMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: February 12, 2018 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties and/or counsel of record on February 12, 2018, by electronic means and/or ordinary mail. s/Holly A. Monda Case Manager (810) 341-9764 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?