Spencer v. Barton County Ambulance District et al

Filing 48

ORDER granting 47 motion for leave to file amended answer and counterclaims; denying as moot 19 motion to dismiss counterclaim; and denying as moot 40 motion to strike affirmative defenses. Defendant Barton County Ambulance District shall have three business days to electronically file its Amended Answer and Counterclaims. Signed on 1/5/17 by District Judge Roseann Ketchmark. (Perry, Madison)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION
ROBERT E. SPENCER,
Plaintiff,
v.
BARTON COUNTY AMBULANCE
DISTRICT, LEISA BLANCHARD,
PAUL STEBBINS, CHERYL WOOD,
JOE FRANCIES and CRAIG LEHMAN,
Defendants.

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

Case No. 16-05083-CV-SW-RK

ORDER (1) GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED ANSWER AND
COUNTERCLAIMS AND (2) FINDING AS MOOT PLAINITFF’S MOTION TO
DISMISS COUNTERCLAIMS AND PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO STRIKE DEFENSES
Pending are (1) Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims, (2) Plaintiff’s Motion to
Strike Affirmative Defenses, and (3) Defendant Barton County Ambulance District’s (“BCAD”)
Motion for Leave to File Amended Answer and Counterclaims. As discussed below, BCAD’s
Motion, (doc. 47), is GRANTED, which renders Plaintiff’s motions (docs. 19 and 40), MOOT.
Background
Plaintiff filed a four-count Complaint on July 18, 2016, seeking damages from BCAD
and five of BCAD’s Board Members. (Doc. 1.) On August 17, 2016, BCAD filed an Answer to
Plaintiff’s Complaint that included Affirmative Defenses and Counterclaims. (Doc. 7.) On
September 6, 2016, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint, (doc. 22), and BCAD filed an
Answer to the First Amended Complaint. (Doc. 30.)
Plaintiff then filed two motions. First, he filed a Motion to Dismiss, (doc. 19), which
asks the Court to dismiss BCAD’s Counterclaims. Then, he filed a Motion to Strike, (doc. 40),
which asks the Court to strike some of BCAD’s Affirmative Defenses.
After the briefing on Plaintiff’s motions was completed, BCAD filed its Motion for
Leave to File Amended Answer and Counterclaims. (Doc. 47.) Some of the amendments are
intended to address issues Plaintiff has raised in his two motions. (Doc. 47 at 2-3.) Plaintiff has
not responded to BCAD’s motion, and the time for doing so has passed. See Local Rule
7.0(c)(2).

Discussion
The Court begins by considering BCAD’s motion. A party is permitted to amend its
pleadings with leave of court, and “[t]he court should freely give leave when justice so requires.”
Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). The Court concludes BCAD should be granted the opportunity it
requests to address the issues raised in Plaintiff’s motions. This conclusion is reinforced by the
fact that (1) Plaintiff has not opposed the request and (2) BCAD’s motion was filed within the
time limits set in the Scheduling Order. (Doc. 26, ¶ 2.) Therefore, BCAD’s Motion for Leave to
File Amended Answer and Counterclaims is granted.
Plaintiff’s motions are directed to BCAD’s current pleading, and are rendered moot by
the Amended Answer and Counterclaims. See Pure Country, Inc. v. Sigma Chi Fraternity, 312
F.3d 952, 956 (8th Cir. 2002). Of course, Plaintiff is free to evaluate whether his arguments
should be re-asserted in a new motion after the amended pleading is filed.
Conclusion
BCAD’s Motion for Leave to File Amended Answer and Counterclaims, (doc. 47), is
GRANTED, and BCAD shall have three business days to electronically file its Amended
Answer and Counterclaims. Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims, (doc. 19), and Motion
to Strike Affirmative Defenses, (Doc. 40), are DENIED as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Roseann A. Ketchmark
ROSEANN A. KETCHMARK, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DATED: January 5, 2017

2