Whaley v. Portfolio Recovery Associates LLC

Filing 9

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - The plaintiffs amended complaint, (Doc. 8 ), will be lodged by the clerk as the amended complaint and operative pleading in this matter. Since the initial complaint is now a legal nullity the defendants motion for more defini te statement relating to that initial complaint, (Doc. 4), is DISMISSED as moot. However, this order is entered without prejudice to the assertion of any defenses or dispositive motions that the defendant may believe are appropriate with respect to the amended complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson on July 16, 2020. (kjn)

Case 4:20-cv-01086-MCC Document 9 Filed 07/16/20 Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
GEORGE WHALEY, JR.,

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Plaintiff,
v.
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY
ASSOCIATES LCC,
Defendant.

Civil No. 4:20-CV-1086

(Magistrate Judge Carlson)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The background of this order is as follows:
The plaintiff is proceeding pro se in this case. The defendant removed this
action to federal court and filed a motion for more definite statement on July 6,
2020. (Doc. 4). Nine days later, Mr. Whaley filed an amended complaint on July 15,
2020, apparently in response to this motion for more definite statement. (Doc. 8).
Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which governs amendment of
pleadings strongly favors amendment of pleadings, and allows a party to amend a
complaint as a matter of course within 21 days after the filing of a motion for more
definite statement. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B).
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1

Case 4:20-cv-01086-MCC Document 9 Filed 07/16/20 Page 2 of 3

The plaintiff’s amended complaint, (Doc. 8), will be lodged by the clerk as the
amended complaint and operative pleading in this matter. We believe that this
development has substantive significance for the parties with respect to the pending
defense motion to for more definite statement related to the original complaint since,
as a matter of law, an amended complaint takes the place of the original complaint,
effectively invalidating the original 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

Y

supersedes the pleading it modifiesY. Once an amended pleading is interposed, the
original pleading no longer performs any function in the caseY."). Therefore, since
the initial complaint is now a legal nullity the defendant’s motion for more definite
statement relating to that initial complaint, (Doc. 4), is DISMISSED as moot.
However, this order is entered without prejudice to the assertion of any defenses or
dispositive motions that the defendant may believe are appropriate with respect to
the amended complaint.

2

Case 4:20-cv-01086-MCC Document 9 Filed 07/16/20 Page 3 of 3

SO ORDERED, this 16th day of July 2020.

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

3