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)

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
[phone]

3