Stevenson v. Pramstaller

Full title: BURVIN STEVENSON, Plaintiff, v. GEORGE PRAMSTALLER, et al., Defendants

Court: United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

Date published: Dec 3, 2007

CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-CV-14040-DT (E.D. Mich. Dec. 3, 2007)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-CV-14040-DT.

December 3, 2007

OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT

MONA MAJZOUB, Magistrate Judge

This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff's "Motion to Amend 1983 Pleadings" filed on November 1, 2007 which the Court will construe as a motion to amend his Compliant. (Docket no. 3). All pretrial matters have been referred to the undersigned for decision. (Docket no. 5). The Court disposes with oral argument on these motions. E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(e). The record does not show that Defendants have been served a summons and copy of the Complaint.¹ No response to this motion has been filed likely because of this lack of service of process. This motion is now ready for ruling.

1 Plaintiff paid the filing fee and is not proceeding in forma pauperis.

This is a civil rights action filed by a state prisoner. Rule 15(a), Fed.R.Civ.P., provides that a party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course prior to service of a responsive pleading or within twenty days of serving its pleading if no responsive pleading is required. "Otherwise a party may amend the party's pleading only by leave of court or by written consent of the adverse party; and leave shall be freely given when justice so requires." Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a). The decision whether to permit amendment is committed to the discretion of the trial court. Lucas v. Schneider Nat'l Carriers, Inc., 953 F.2d 644 (6^th Cir. 1992) (unpublished).

Plaintiff attached a copy of his Amended Complaint to his Motion to Amend (docket no. 3). The attachments to his original Complaint are not affixed to his Amended Complaint, however. Because no responsive pleading has yet been filed, the Court finds that Plaintiff's Amended Complaint should be filed under Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a). Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion will be granted.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Amend 1983 Pleadings (docket no. 3) is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff file with the Clerk of Court a complete copy of his Amended Complaint (which will be substituted for his original Complaint) on or before December 12, 2007.

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(a), the parties have a period of ten days from the date of this Order within which to file any written appeal to the District Judge as may be permissible under 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1).