From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

The Travelers Indem. Co. of Am. v. Epperley

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Statesville Division
Jul 5, 2022
Civil Action 5:22-CV-00040-KDB-DSC (W.D.N.C. Jul. 5, 2022)

Opinion

Civil Action 5:22-CV-00040-KDB-DSC

07-05-2022

THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY OF AMERICA et. al., Plaintiffs, v. NELSON R. EPPERLEY et. al., Defendants.


ORDER

David S. Cayer United States Magistrate Judge.

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendants' “Motion[s] to Dismiss ...” (documents ##6 and 10) filed June 8, 2022, and June 17, 2022, respectively. Plaintiffs filed their “Amended Complaint” (document #13) on June 29, 2022.

Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs amendments to pleadings. Rule 15(a)(1) grants a party the right to “amend its pleading once as a matter of course,” if done within twenty-one days after serving the pleading, Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a)(1)(A), or “if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required,” a party may amend once as a matter of course, provided that it does so within “21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a)(1)(B). The Rule further provides that leave to amend shall be freely given “when justice so requires.” Id.

Plaintiffs filed their Amended Complaint as of right within twenty-one days following receipt of the Defendants' Motions to Dismiss.

It is well settled that an amended pleading supersedes the original pleading, and that motions directed at superseded pleadings are to be denied as moot. Y oung v. City of Mount Ranier, 238 F.3d 567, 573 (4th Cir. 2001) (amended pleading renders original pleading of no effect); Turner v. Kight, 192 F.Supp.2d 391, 397 (D. Md. 2002) (denying as moot motion to dismiss original complaint on grounds that amended complaint superseded original complaint).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:

1. Defendants' “Motion[s] to Dismiss ...” (documents ##6 and 10) are administratively DENIED as moot without prejudice.
2. The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to counsel for the parties and to the Honorable Kenneth D. Bell.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

The Travelers Indem. Co. of Am. v. Epperley

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Statesville Division
Jul 5, 2022
Civil Action 5:22-CV-00040-KDB-DSC (W.D.N.C. Jul. 5, 2022)
Case details for

The Travelers Indem. Co. of Am. v. Epperley

Case Details

Full title:THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY OF AMERICA et. al., Plaintiffs, v. NELSON…

Court:United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Statesville Division

Date published: Jul 5, 2022

Citations

Civil Action 5:22-CV-00040-KDB-DSC (W.D.N.C. Jul. 5, 2022)