From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Taylor v. County of Pima

United States District Court, District of Arizona
Jul 30, 2021
No. CV-15-00152-TUC-RM (D. Ariz. Jul. 30, 2021)

Opinion

CV-15-00152-TUC-RM

07-30-2021

Louis Taylor, Plaintiff, v. County of Pima, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Honorable Rosemary Marquez, United States District Judge.

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Supplement Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”), in which Plaintiff seeks leave pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(d) to supplement his TAC with allegations concerning events that occurred after Plaintiff moved for leave to file the TAC. (Doc. 246.) Defendants responded, stating that they do not concede that Plaintiff's supplemental allegations satisfy Rule 15(d) but that, in the interests of fairness and judicial economy, they do not oppose Plaintiff's Motion for Leave and instead plan to file a motion to dismiss and/or strike. (Doc. 249.) After Defendants filed their Response, Plaintiff filed his Supplemented TAC. (Doc. 251.)

Other pending motions will be resolved separately.

“On motion and reasonable notice, the court may, on just terms, permit a party to serve a supplemental pleading setting out any transaction, occurrence, or event that happened after the date of the pleading to be supplemented.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(d).

Pursuant to Rule 15(d), and there being no objection, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Supplement Third Amended Complaint (Doc. 246) is granted, nunc pro tunc. Plaintiffs Supplemented TAC (Doc. 251) is considered properly filed.


Summaries of

Taylor v. County of Pima

United States District Court, District of Arizona
Jul 30, 2021
No. CV-15-00152-TUC-RM (D. Ariz. Jul. 30, 2021)
Case details for

Taylor v. County of Pima

Case Details

Full title:Louis Taylor, Plaintiff, v. County of Pima, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, District of Arizona

Date published: Jul 30, 2021

Citations

No. CV-15-00152-TUC-RM (D. Ariz. Jul. 30, 2021)