Justiz v. Virgin America Airlines
Filing
7
ORDER re 5 Addendum to Complaint filed by Wendy Justiz. Plaintiff shall have until 4/16/14 to file an amended complaint. If properly filed, the Amended Complaint will be granted nunc pro tunc to the date of the initial filing, January 28, 2013. Signed by Magistrate Judge George Foley, Jr on 3/16/14. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - EDS)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
7
8
9
10
11
WENDY JUSTIZ,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
VIRGIN AMERICAN AIRLINES,
)
)
Defendant.
)
__________________________________________)
Case No. 2:13-cv-00145-JCM-GWF
ORDER
Addendum to Complaint (#5)
12
13
14
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff Wendy Justiz’s (“Plaintiff”) Addendum to
Complaint, filed on April 8, 2013.
15
16
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff filed an Application for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis on January 28, 2013.
17
Plaintiff’s Complaint, however, was dismissed without prejudice for failing to exhaust her
18
administrative remedies. Pursuant to Court Order (#2), Plaintiff was instructed to file an Amended
19
Complaint to cure the deficiencies by May 14, 2013. Plaintiff instead filed an Addendum to
20
Complaint (#5) (“Addendum”) on April 8, 2013, attaching her right-to-sue letter from the Equal
21
Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”). On the Addendum, Plaintiff inquired whether
22
the Addendum was sufficient in lieu of an Amended Complaint. Unfortunately, the Court did not
23
recognize Plaintiff’s request and failed to respond. Pursuant to Plaintiff’s right-to-sue letter, she had
24
90 days to file her lawsuit from the date she received her Dismissal and Notice of Rights from the
25
EEOC dated October 31, 2012.
26
27
28
DISCUSSION
A statute of limitations is subject to the doctrine of equitable tolling, therefore, relief from
strict construction of a statute of limitations is readily available in extreme cases and gives the court
1
latitude in a case-by-case analysis. See Scholar v. Pacific Bell, 963 F.2d 264, 268 (9th Cir. 1992).
2
The Supreme Court has held that the statutory time limits applicable to lawsuits against private
3
employers under Title VII are subject to equitable tolling. See Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.,
4
455 U.S. 385, 394 (1982). The equitable tolling doctrine has been applied by the Supreme Court in
5
certain circumstances, but it has been applied sparingly; for example, the Supreme Court has
6
allowed equitable tolling when the statute of limitations was not complied with because of
7
defective pleadings. See Irwin v. Veterans Admin., 498 U.S. 89 (1990).
8
Here it appears Plaintiff was timely with her filing, however, due to a defective pleading
9
and the Court’s oversight involving the inquiry on Plaintiff’s Addendum, Plaintiff’s claim has not
10
moved forward. In fairness to Plaintiff and in the interest of justice, this Court will allow Plaintiff
11
30 days leave to amend her Complaint with the right-to-sue letter. If Plaintiff properly amends her
12
Complaint within the 30 day period, this Court will grant the amended complaint nunc pro tunc to
13
the date of the initial filing, January 28, 2013. Plaintiff is again reminded that the Court cannot
14
refer to a prior pleading to make her amended complaint complete. Local Rule 15-1 requires that
15
an amended complaint be complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. This is
16
because, as a general rule, an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. See Loux v.
17
Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Once Plaintiff files an amended complaint, the original
18
pleading no longer serves any function in the case. Therefore, in an amended complaint, as in an
19
original complaint, each claim and the involvement of each defendant must be sufficiently alleged.
20
Accordingly,
21
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have until April 16, 2014 to file an
22
amended complaint. If properly filed, the Amended Complaint will be granted nunc pro tunc to the
23
date of the initial filing, January 28, 2013.
24
DATED this 16th day of March, 2014
25
26
27
______________________________________
GEORGE FOLEY, JR.
United States Magistrate Judge
28
2
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?