From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Blanchard v. City of Winter Haven

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division
Jun 2, 2010
CASE NO: 8:09-cv-2049-T-33AEP (M.D. Fla. Jun. 2, 2010)

Opinion

CASE NO: 8:09-cv-2049-T-33AEP.

June 2, 2010


ORDER


This cause comes before the Court pursuant to Defendants Polk County and Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 5) and Defendants City of Winter Haven and Mark Levine's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 6). Plaintiff filed a Memorandum of Law in Opposition to each motion (Docs. # 11 12, respectively).

In his response, Plaintiff requests 20 days to file an amended complaint and asserts that "certain events related to and dependent on the events of which complaint is made herein have transpired since the filing of the initial complaint herein which require the amendment of the complaint to assert various other constitutional violations of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Although not acknowledging any deficiency in the initial complaint herein . . . an opportunity to amend the complaint to add additional counts and/or defendants would also allow . . . counsel to separate the claims as to each of these defendants, and clarify plaintiff's claims of entitlement to relief and what relief is sought as to each defendant." (Doc. # 11 at p. 4-5). "Many, if not all, of the deficiencies on which these defendants have based their Motion to Dismiss can and will be addressed in an Amended Complaint." (Doc. # 12 at p. 2).

A decision whether to grant or deny a motion for leave to file an amended complaint is within the sound discretion of the district court. Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). Under Rule 15(a)(2), Fed.R.Civ.P., "[t]he court should freely give leave when justice so requires." The Court construes Plaintiff's responses as motions to amend the complaint and finds that such motions are due to be granted.

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:

(1) Defendants Polk County and Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 5) is DENIED AS MOOT with leave to re-file as necessary.
(2) Defendants City of Winter Haven and Mark Levine's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 6) is DENIED AS MOOT with leave to re-file as necessary.
(3) Plaintiff shall file his amended complaint within 20 days of the date of this Order.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida.


Summaries of

Blanchard v. City of Winter Haven

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division
Jun 2, 2010
CASE NO: 8:09-cv-2049-T-33AEP (M.D. Fla. Jun. 2, 2010)
Case details for

Blanchard v. City of Winter Haven

Case Details

Full title:LARRY BLANCHARD d/b/a LARRY'S AMOCO/BP AND WRECKER SERVICE, Plaintiff, v…

Court:United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division

Date published: Jun 2, 2010

Citations

CASE NO: 8:09-cv-2049-T-33AEP (M.D. Fla. Jun. 2, 2010)