From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sexton v. Clark Cnty. Det. Ctr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Dec 28, 2016
2:16-cv-02289-RFB-VCF (D. Nev. Dec. 28, 2016)

Opinion

2:16-cv-02289-RFB-VCF

12-28-2016

AMANDA LEA SEXTON, Plaintiff, v. CLARK COUNTY DETENTION CENTER et al., Defendants.


ORDER

I. DISCUSSION

On November 21, 2016, the clerk's office docketed this Court's November 18, 2016 screening order on Plaintiff's second amended complaint. (ECF No. 5). On November 23, 2016, the clerk's office docketed Plaintiff's "first" amended complaint dated November 16, 2016. (ECF No. 6). Based on the dates of the two documents, it appears that Plaintiff submitted her "first" amended complaint prior to receiving this Court's screening order.

This is a severed case. The Court used the second amended complaint from the original case as the operative complaint in this case. (See ECF No. 1). --------

The Court will not screen Plaintiff's "first" amended complaint. (ECF No. 6). Instead, if Plaintiff seeks to file an amended complaint, she must comply with this Court's November 18, 2016 screening order and file a "third" amended complaint within thirty (30) days from the date of this order. If Plaintiff chooses not to file a third amended complaint, this action will proceed on the second amended complaint (ECF No. 3) on Count II (Chavez, Robinson, Adams, and Niswonger), Counts III and IV (Adams, Gregg, Niswonger, M. Smith, Acevedo, Coker, Hogan, Delacruz, Goins, Macsucel, Cadet, C. Smith, Lombardo, and Williamson), Count V (Doe Defendants), Count VI (County of Clark Nevada, City of Las Vegas, LVMPD, Lombardo, and Yannis), and Count VII (Adams, Gregg, Niswonger, M. Smith, Acevedo, Coker, Hogan, Delacruz, Goins, Macsucel, Cadet, C. Smith, Lombardo, Williamson, and Moers) only.

II. CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that if Plaintiff chooses to file a third amended complaint curing the deficiencies of her second amended complaint, as outlined in the November 18, 2016 screening order, Plaintiff shall file the third amended complaint within thirty (30) days from the date of entry of this order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall send to Plaintiff the approved form for filing a § 1983 complaint, instructions for the same, and a copy of the November 18, 2016 screening order (ECF No. 5). If Plaintiff chooses to file a third amended complaint, she must use the approved form and she shall write the words "Third Amended" above the words "Civil Rights Complaint" in the caption.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Plaintiff chooses not to file a third amended complaint curing the stated deficiencies of the second amended complaint (ECF No. 3), this action shall proceed on the second amended complaint's Count II (Chavez, Robinson, Adams, and Niswonger), Counts III and IV (Adams, Gregg, Niswonger, M. Smith, Acevedo, Coker, Hogan, Delacruz, Goins, Macsucel, Cadet, C. Smith, Lombardo, and Williamson), Count V (Doe Defendants), Count VI (County of Clark Nevada, City of Las Vegas, LVMPD, Lombardo, and Yannis), and Count VII (Adams, Gregg, Niswonger, M. Smith, Acevedo, Coker, Hogan, Delacruz, Goins, Macsucel, Cadet, C. Smith, Lombardo, Williamson, and Moers) only.

DATED: This 28th day of December, 2016.

/s/_________

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Sexton v. Clark Cnty. Det. Ctr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Dec 28, 2016
2:16-cv-02289-RFB-VCF (D. Nev. Dec. 28, 2016)
Case details for

Sexton v. Clark Cnty. Det. Ctr.

Case Details

Full title:AMANDA LEA SEXTON, Plaintiff, v. CLARK COUNTY DETENTION CENTER et al.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Dec 28, 2016

Citations

2:16-cv-02289-RFB-VCF (D. Nev. Dec. 28, 2016)