Schram v. Department of Health and Human Services et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's claim in his second "Supplemental Complaint" 19 is dismissed for failure to state claim. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(GJG)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
LISA LAURELL, Social Worker;
SHANNON BLACK, Program Director;
CINDY DYKEMAN, AND Program
Manager; and MARILYN BAILEY,
This matter is before the court on its own motion. On January 19, 2017, this
court entered an order allowing some of Plaintiff’s claims to proceed to service of
process and dismissing the rest for failure to state a claim. (Filing No. 16.) Before
doing so, this court reviewed Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint filed on September
26, 2016, and “Supplemental Complaint” filed on November 7, 2016. (See id. at
CM/ECF p. 1.) On January 25, 2017, Plaintiff filed a second “Supplemental
Complaint.” (Filing No. 19.) In his second “Supplemental Complaint,” Plaintiff
alleges that a fellow patient used racially discriminatory language against him. (Id.)
The court dismissed a similar claim involving different patients in its January 19th
order. (Filing No. 16 at CM/ECF p. 2, 4.) For the same reasons, this claim is also
The court also cautions Plaintiff that, in the future, he must seek leave of the
court to file any supplemental pleadings. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(d). He must also
seek leave to file any amended pleading and must attach a copy of his proposed
amended pleading to the motion to amend. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a); NECivR
15.1. The court warns Plaintiff that this case has now proceeded to service of
process and the court will not permit the piecemeal filing of supplemental
pleadings and requests to amend.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Plaintiff’s claim in his second
“Supplemental Complaint” is dismissed for failure to state claim.
Dated this 31st day of January, 2017.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Richard G. Kopf
Senior United States District Judge
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?