Henderson v. Cabarrus County Sheriff's Office et al

Filing 19

ORDER denying as moot Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment and Summary Judg[]ment (Document No. 8 ) and Plaintiff's "Notice of Default..." (Document No. 4 ). Signed by US Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 5/9/24. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(mga)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:23-CV-367-RJC-DCK
JEREMY LAMOND HENDERSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
CABARRUS COUNTY SHERIFF'S
OFFICE, et al.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT regarding Plaintiff’s “Amended
Complaint” (Document No. 10) filed on February 21, 2024. This case has been referred to the
undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and immediate review is
appropriate.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 applies to the amendment of pleadings and allows a
party to amend once as a matter of course within 21 days after serving, or “if the pleading is one
to which a responsive pleading is required, 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). Rule 15 further provides:
(2) Other Amendments. In all other cases, a party may amend its
pleading only with the opposing party's written consent or the court's
leave. The court should freely give leave when justice so requires.
Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a)(2).
Although it does not appear that Plaintiff’s “Amended Complaint” (Document No. 10) was
timely filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 15, in this instance, the Court will allow the Amended

Complaint (Document No. 10), which will now supersede the original Complaint (Document No.
1).
Where an amended pleading supersedes the original pleading, the motions directed at the
original pleading may be denied as moot. See Young v. City of Mount Ranier, 238 F.3d 567, 573
(4th Cir. 2001) (“The general rule ... is that an amended pleading supersedes the original pleading,
rendering the original pleading of no effect.”); see also, Fawzy v. Wauquiez Boats SNC, 873 F.3d
451, 455 (4th Cir. 2017) (“Because a properly filed amended complaint supersedes the original
one and becomes the operative complaint in the case, it renders the original complaint ‘of no
effect.’”).
Based on the foregoing, the undersigned finds that Plaintiff’s requests for default judgment
(Document Nos. 4 and 8) based on the original Complaint should be denied as moot.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Plaintiff’s “Notice of Default…” (Document
No. 4) and “Plaintiff’s Motion For A Default And Summary Judg[]ment (Document No. 8) are
DENIED AS MOOT.
SO ORDERED.
Signed: May 9, 2024

2