Filed: Feb. 19, 2020
Latest Update: Feb. 19, 2020
Summary: ORDER NANNETTE JOLIVETTE BROWN , Chief District Judge . Plaintiff Johnny Thornton ("Plaintiff") filed a complaint on August 25, 2019 alleging that Defendants Corey Lymous ("Lymous") and the City of New Orleans ("the City") (collectively, "Defendants") violated several of Plaintiff's constitutional rights due to a wrongful arrest. 1 Before the Court is Defendants' first "Motion to Dismiss." 2 On October 23, 2019, Defendants filed the instant motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Proced
Summary: ORDER NANNETTE JOLIVETTE BROWN , Chief District Judge . Plaintiff Johnny Thornton ("Plaintiff") filed a complaint on August 25, 2019 alleging that Defendants Corey Lymous ("Lymous") and the City of New Orleans ("the City") (collectively, "Defendants") violated several of Plaintiff's constitutional rights due to a wrongful arrest. 1 Before the Court is Defendants' first "Motion to Dismiss." 2 On October 23, 2019, Defendants filed the instant motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedu..
More
ORDER
NANNETTE JOLIVETTE BROWN, Chief District Judge.
Plaintiff Johnny Thornton ("Plaintiff") filed a complaint on August 25, 2019 alleging that Defendants Corey Lymous ("Lymous") and the City of New Orleans ("the City") (collectively, "Defendants") violated several of Plaintiff's constitutional rights due to a wrongful arrest.1 Before the Court is Defendants' first "Motion to Dismiss."2 On October 23, 2019, Defendants filed the instant motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).3 On December 14, 2019, the Court held oral argument on the instant motion.4 During oral argument, Plaintiff requested leave to amend the Complaint. Defendants explicitly stated that they did not object to Plaintiff amending the Complaint. On December 18, 2019, Plaintiff filed a "First Supplemental and Amending Complaint."5 On January 2, 2020, Defendants filed a second "Motion to Dismiss" in order to address the Amended Complaint.6
Courts vary in how they proceed when a plaintiff files an amended complaint while a Rule 12(b)(6) motion is still pending.7 Many district courts—including this Court—routinely deny as moot any motion to dismiss that is filed prior to an amendment of a complaint.8 Although courts may address the merits of a motion to dismiss after an amended complaint is filed, as a general rule, "if applying the pending motion to the amended complaint would cause confusion or detract from the efficient resolution of the issues, then it makes sense to require the defendant to file a new motion specifically addressing the amended complaint."9
The instant motion states that Plaintiff failed to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).10 Plaintiff has filed an amended complaint to clarify his claims and provide additional facts to support those claims.11 Further, Defendants have recently filed a second motion to dismiss, which responds directly to the Amended Complaint.12 Therefore, the Court concludes that applying the pending motion to the Amended Complaint would cause confusion and detract from the efficient resolution of the issues. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Cory Lymous and the City of New Orleans's first "Motion to Dismiss"13 is MOOT.
