Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

DERRINGER v. CRACKER BARREL OLD COUNTRY STORE, INC., 2:15-cv-362-SPC-38MRM. (2015)

Court: District Court, M.D. Florida Number: infdco20150805729 Visitors: 7
Filed: Aug. 04, 2015
Latest Update: Aug. 04, 2015
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on review of the docket. On June 18, 2015, a Motion to Amend Complaint was filed on the docket under Plaintiff's name. ( Doc. #5 ). Thereafter, Defendant filed a Response in Opposition ( Doc. #8 ), and the Court entered an Order denying the motion ( Doc. #15 ). Plaintiff now asks the Court to vacate its Order on the basis that she did not file this Motion with this Court. ( Doc. #16 at 3-4 ). As Plaintiff
More

ORDER1

This matter comes before the Court on review of the docket. On June 18, 2015, a Motion to Amend Complaint was filed on the docket under Plaintiff's name. (Doc. #5). Thereafter, Defendant filed a Response in Opposition (Doc. #8), and the Court entered an Order denying the motion (Doc. #15). Plaintiff now asks the Court to vacate its Order on the basis that she did not file this Motion with this Court. (Doc. #16 at 3-4). As Plaintiff explains, the Motion was pending in Florida state court before the action was removed, and once this action was removed, Defendant filed it with this Court. (Doc. #16 at 3-4). Defendant does not dispute that it filed the Motion, but instead contends that this filing was proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1446. (Doc. #17 at 8). The Court disagrees.

Section 1446 provides that when removing an action to federal court, the defendant must file, among other things, "a copy of all process, pleadings, and orders" served upon the defendant in the state court action. 28 U.S.C. 1446 (a). A pending motion, however, is not a process, pleading, or order, and therefore does not need to be filed with the federal court upon removal. Consequently, the Court finds that the Motion to Amend Complaint was improperly filed.

Based on the foregoing, the Court will vacate its July 9, 2015 Order (Doc. #15). The Court will also strike Plaintiff's Motion to Amend (Doc. #5), Defendant's Response in Opposition (Doc. #8), and the July 9, 2015 Order (Doc. #15) from the docket.

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED:

1. The Court's July 9, 2015 Order denying Plaintiff's Motion to Amend (Doc. #15) is VACATED. 2. The Clerk is directed to STRIKE Plaintiff's Motion to Amend (Doc. #5), Defendant's Response in Opposition (Doc. #8), and the Court's July 9, 2015 Order (Doc. #15) from the docket.

DONE and ORDERED.

FootNotes


1. Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users' convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other websites, this Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their websites. The Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer