Perrier v. Binette, et al

Filing 11

ORDER granting 3 Motion to Amend 1 Complaint.Text of order: Yesterday's order (document no. 10) is vacated. Motion to amend complaint granted. Within 48 hours counsel shall electronically refile the pleading attached to the Motion to Amend using the appropriate event in CMECF. So Ordered by Chief Judge Joseph N. Laplante. Amended Pleadings due by 4/23/2012.(jb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Kevin Perrier
v.

Civil No. 12-cv-22-JL

Paul Binette
O R D E R
Yesterday’s order (document no. 10) is vacated based on an
obvious scrivener’s error.

The plaintiff’s motion to amend

complaint (document no. 3) is GRANTED without prejudice to the
defendants’ futility or sufficiency arguments if asserted in a
more appropriate procedural posture.

While the defendants'

substantive arguments may or may not have merit, they are
incorrect on the procedural law pertaining to amendments as a
matter of course under Rule 15(a).

The district court has no

discretion to reject an amended pleading filed before a
responsive pleading is served, even if the court considers the
amendment futile.

Taite v. Peake, No. 08-cv-258-SM, 2009 WL

94526, *1 (D.N.H. Jan. 9, 2009) (quoting 3 Moore's Fed. Practice,
§§ 15.10-.11 (3d ed. 2008)).
SO ORDERED.

Joseph N. Laplante
United States District Judge
Dated: April 18, 2012

cc:

Kevin Buchholz, Esq.
Margaret A. O’Brien, Esq.
Mark T. Broth, Esq.

2