White v. Wireman et al

Filing 32

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER dimsimming 21 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM as MOOT. We will by a separate Report and Recommendation address the pending motion to dismiss the plaintiffs second amended complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson on February 8, 2018. (kjn)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IVAN WHITE,

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Plaintiffs,
v.
DARRELL WIREMAN, et al.,
Defendants.

Civil No. 1:16-CV-675

(Judge Mannion)

(Magistrate Judge Carlson)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER1
The background of this order is as follows:
This is a federal civil rights lawsuit filed by a state prisoner against various
correctional officials. In the course of this litigation, the plaintiff filed an amended
complaint. (Doc. 20.) The defendants subsequently moved to dismiss this amended
complaint. (Doc. 21.) Following the filing of this motion to dismiss the plaintiff filed
a second amended complaint. (Doc. 27.) The defendants have now moved to dismiss
this second amended complaint. (Doc. 28.)
We believe that this development has substantive significance for the parties
with respect to the initial motion to dismiss the first amended complaint filed in this
case (Doc. 20) since, as a matter of law, the second amended complaint takes the place

1

On February 7, 2018, the above-captioned case was reassigned to the
undersigned for further proceedings.
1

of the prior amended complaint, effectively invalidating that prior amended complaint.
Crysen/Montenay Energy Co. v. Shell Oil Co. (In re Crysen/Montenay Energy Co.),
226 F.3d 160, 162 (2d Cir. 2000) ("[A]n amended pleading ordinarily supersedes the
original and renders it of no legal effect"); see 6 Charles Alan Wright, Arthur R.
Miller & Mary Kay Kane, Federal Practice & Procedure § 1476 (2d ed. 1990) ("A
pleading that has been amended … supersedes the pleading it modifies…. Once an
amended pleading is interposed, the original pleading no longer performs any function
in the case…."). Since the amended complaint in this case has been replaced by a
second amended complaint, the first amended complaint is now a nullity, and any
motion to dismiss challenging counts contained in that first amended complaint is now
moot. Therefore, we will DISMISS the pending motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s first
amended complaint (Doc. 20) as moot. We will by a separate Report and
Recommendation address the pending motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s second
amended complaint.
SO ORDERED, this 8th day of February, 2018.

/s/ Martin C. Carlson
Martin C. Carlson
United States Magistrate Judge

2