Emmanuel et al v. King County et al

Filing 3

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE directing Plaintiffs to show cause as to why the court should not treat Plaintiffs' 2 corrected complaint as an amended complaint. Show Cause Response due by Monday, March 19, 2018, at 5:00 p.m. Signed by Judge James L. Robart. (PM)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

8
9
10

KEITH EMMANUEL, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

11

CASE NO. C18-0377JLR
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

v.
12
13

KING COUNTY, et al.,
Defendants.

14
15

On March 12, 2018, Plaintiffs Keith Emmanuel, Richard Homchick, and Charles

16

Peters (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this lawsuit against a number of political

17

subdivisions, governmental entities, and individuals. (See Compl. (Dkt. # 1).) The

18

following day, Plaintiffs filed a “corrected complaint.” (See Corr. Compl. (Dkt. # 2).)

19

Although the phrase “corrected complaint” suggests that Plaintiffs merely remedied

20

errors in the original complaint, the court’s review reveals that the later filing contains

21

changes other than simple corrections. (Compare, e.g., Compl. ¶¶ 1-2, 26, with Corr.

22

Compl. ¶¶ 1-2, 26.) The District’s Local Civil Rules, however, contemplate that

ORDER - 1

1

corrected documents may be filed only to remedy errors. See Local Rules W.D. Wash.

2

LCR 7(m) (“In the event that an error is discovered, a party should file . . . a praecipe

3

requesting that the court consider a corrected document . . . .”). Moreover, Plaintiffs

4

failed to file a praecipe specifying “the corrections by page and line number” along with

5

the “corrected complaint.” Id. Accordingly, the court ORDERS Plaintiffs to show cause

6

no later than Monday, March 19, 2018, at 5:00 p.m. why the court should not treat

7

Plaintiffs’ “corrected complaint” as an amended complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of

8

Civil Procedure 15.1 See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1) (stating that a party may amend its

9

pleading once as a matter of right within 21 days after serving the pleading or the service

10

of a responsive pleading or motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier). The

11

Plaintiffs must limit their submission to no more than three (3) pages.

12

Dated this 14th day of March, 2018.

13
14

A

15

JAMES L. ROBART
United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22

1

No defendant has yet appeared in this matter. (See Dkt.) If, however, a defendant
appears before the deadline the court has set for Plaintiffs’ submission, the defendant may also
file a response to the court’s order, subject to the same time and page limitations.

ORDER - 2