Robinson v. Buncombe County, et al

Filing 15

ORDER administratively denying as moot without prejudice the 7 Motion to Dismiss Jack Van Duncan; administratively denying as moot without prejudice the 8 Motion to Dismiss Western Surety Company; administratively denying as moot without prejudice 10 Buncombe County's Motion to Dismiss. Signed by Magistrate Judge David S. Cayer on 3/8/2017. (kby)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17-CV-00016-MR-DSC
TIMOTHY CHARLES ROBINSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
BUNCOMBE COUNTY, JACK VAN
DUNCAN AND WESTERN SURETY
COMPANY,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER is before the Court on the “Motion to Dismiss Jack Van Duncan”
(document #7), “Motion to Dismiss Western Surety Company” (document #8), and “Buncombe
County’s Motion to Dismiss” (document #10) all filed February 14, 2017. This matter was referred
to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs amendments to pleadings. Rule
15(a)(1) grants a party the right to “amend its pleading once as a matter of course,” if done within
twenty-one (21) days after serving the pleading, Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(A), or “if the pleading is
one to which a responsive pleading is required,” a party may amend once as a matter of course,
provided that it does so within “21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after
service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B).
The Rule further provides that leave to amend shall be freely given “when justice so requires.” Id.

Defendants filed these Motions to Dismiss on February 14, 2017. Plaintiff filed his First
Amended Complaint (document #14) on March 7, 2017, which is within twenty-one (21) days of
the filing of the Motions to Dismiss. Therefore, he may amend his pleading as a matter of course
under Rule 15(a)(1)(B).
It is well settled that an amended pleading supersedes the original pleading, and that
motions directed at superseded pleadings are to be denied as moot. Young v. City of Mount Ranier,
238 F. 3d 567, 573 (4th Cir. 2001) (amended pleading renders original pleading of no effect);
Turner v. Kight, 192 F. Supp. 2d 391, 397 (D. Md. 2002) (denying as moot motion to dismiss
original complaint on grounds that amended complaint superseded original complaint).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.

“Motion to Dismiss Jack Van Duncan” (document #7) is administratively
DENIED as moot without prejudice.

2.

“Motion to Dismiss Western Surety Company” (document #8) is
administratively DENIED as moot without prejudice.

3.

“Buncombe County’s Motion to Dismiss” (document #10) is administratively
DENIED as moot without prejudice.

4.

The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to counsel for the parties,
including but not limited to moving counsel; and to the Honorable Martin
Reidinger.

SO ORDERED.
Signed: March 8, 2017