From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Agnew v. Brands

United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas
Mar 19, 2024
4:21-CV-01222-LPR (E.D. Ark. Mar. 19, 2024)

Opinion

4:21-CV-01222-LPR

03-19-2024

ANDREW WILLIAM AGNEW PLAINTIFF v. CONAGRA BRANDS DEFENDANT


ORDER

LEE P. RUDOFSKY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

This is the Court's second motion to dismiss ruling. On February 22, 2023, the Court granted in part Conagra's original Motion to Dismiss. In that Order, the Court explained the “glaring deficiencies” with the claims Mr. Agnew was trying to state in his Amended Complaint.Although Mr. Agnew did not ask for the opportunity to amend his Complaint, the Court gave him such an opportunity. The Court made clear, however, that any new complaint would render all prior complaints a nullity:

Order Granting in Part Def.'s Mot. to Dismiss (Doc. 38) at 9.

Id.

It is imperative that Mr. Agnew understand that (1) a Second Amended Complaint will nullify all prior Complaints he has filed in this litigation, and (2) therefore he must include in his Second Amended Complaint all factual allegations and all documents that he wants the Court to consider (at this stage of the litigation) in connection with his claims. Any allegations or documents related to his claims that are not expressly included with the Second Amended Complaint will not be considered for purposes of evaluating whether he states a viable claim.

Id.

On March 14, 2023, Mr. Agnew filed a Second Amended Complaint. That Complaint abandoned all, or nearly all, of his prior claims. As the Defendant contends, the Second Amended Complaint seems to be trying to set out a state law claim for wrongful termination and/or some type of challenge to the arbitration award in this case. For precisely the reasons discussed in Defendant's Brief in Support of its Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint, Mr. Agnew fails to state any viable cause of action. The Defendant's brief is entirely correct, and so the Court need not reinvent the wheel in this Order. The instant Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. All claims in this case are dismissed without prejudice.

Second Am. Compl. (Doc. 41) at 1-4.

Def.'s Br. in Supp. of Mot. to Dismiss Second Am. Compl. (Doc. 44) at 1; Second Am. Compl. (Doc. 41) at 2-4.

Def.'s Br. in Supp. of Mot. to Dismiss Second Am. Compl. (Doc. 44) at 2-6.

IT IS SO ORDERED


Summaries of

Agnew v. Brands

United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas
Mar 19, 2024
4:21-CV-01222-LPR (E.D. Ark. Mar. 19, 2024)
Case details for

Agnew v. Brands

Case Details

Full title:ANDREW WILLIAM AGNEW PLAINTIFF v. CONAGRA BRANDS DEFENDANT

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas

Date published: Mar 19, 2024

Citations

4:21-CV-01222-LPR (E.D. Ark. Mar. 19, 2024)