Kruger v. State of Nebraska et al

Filing 42

ORDER that Plaintiff's motion (Filing No. 38) to amend his complaint is granted. Plaintiff shall file his amended complaint on or before December 15, 2014. Defendants' motions to dismiss (Filing No. 16, Filing No. 20, Filing No. 22) are denied as moot. Plaintiff's motion for hearing (Filing No. 32) is denied as moot. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (ADB)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
MICHAEL-RYAN KRUGER, Special
Administrator of the Estate
of Andrea Kruger,

)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
STATE OF NEBRASKA; DEPARTMENT )
OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES;
)
ROBERT HOUSTON, Retired
)
Director, Department of
)
Correctional Services, in his )
official and individual
)
capacities; CAMERON WHITE,
)
Behavioral Health
)
Administrator, Department of )
Corrections, in his official )
and individual capacities;
)
CORRECT CARE SOLUTIONS; DR.
)
NATALIE BAKER, in her official)
and individual capacities;
)
and DR. RANDY KOHL, in his
)
official and individual
)
capacities,
)
)
Defendants.
)
______________________________)

4:14CV3139

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on three motions to
dismiss filed by various defendants (Filing No. 16, Filing No.
20, Filing No. 22) pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
12(b)(3) and 12(b)(6).

The plaintiff has filed a fourth motion

(Filing No. 32) for a hearing on the other three motions.

During

the briefing schedule of these motions, the Legislature held
hearings on the facts underlying this case.

Consequently, the

plaintiff moves (Filing No. 38) to amend his complaint and remove
various defendants.

After review of the motions, briefs, indices

of evidence, relevant case law, and the state of the docket, the
Court will grant the plaintiff leave to amend his complaint.
There are numerous defendants in this matter and each
defendant faces separate legal theories.

The Court will grant

the motion to amend the complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) so that the plaintiff can consolidate
the case with the newly discovered facts, so that dismissed
defendants may be removed from briefing, and so that the
remaining defendants may offer their motions without addressing
the dismissed parties.

The Court does not address whether the

amendment is futile to save the plaintiff’s case.
IT IS ORDERED:
1) Plaintiff’s motion (Filing No. 38) to amend his
complaint is granted.

Plaintiff shall file his amended complaint

on or before December 15, 2014.
2) Defendants’ motions to dismiss (Filing No. 16,
Filing No. 20, Filing No. 22) are denied as moot.

-2-

3) Plaintiff’s motion for hearing (Filing No. 32) is
denied as moot.
DATED this 1st day of December, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Lyle E. Strom
____________________________
LYLE E. STROM, Senior Judge
United States District Court

-3-