“The general rule ... is that an amended pleading supersedes the original pleading, rendering the original pleading of no effect.”
How later courts described this case
- “The general rule ... is that an amended pleading supersedes the original pleading, rendering the original pleading of no effect.”
- “Because a properly filed amended complaint supersedes the original one and becomes the operative complaint in the case, it renders the original complaint ‘of no effect.’”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
STATESVILLE DIVISION
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:20-CV-165-KDB-DCK
A. G., )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) ORDER
)
THE CITY OF STATESVILLE, MICHAEL )
FATTALEH, WILLIAM MANNERS )
IREDELL-STATESVILLE BOARD OF )
EDUCATION, and COLLEEN GUERIN )
a/ka/ COLLEEN FLOOD, )
)
Defendants. )
)
THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT regarding “Defendant Iredell-Statesville
Board Of Education’s Motion To Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint” (Document No. 19) filed
December 4, 2020. This motion has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and immediate review is appropriate. Having carefully considered the
motion, the record, and applicable authority, the undersigned will direct that the pending motion
to dismiss be denied as moot.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 applies to the amendment of pleadings and allows a
party to amend once as a matter of course within 21 days after serving, or “if the pleading is one
to which a responsive pleading is required, 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). Rule 15 further provides:
(2) Other Amendments. In all other cases, a party may amend its
pleading only with the opposing party’s written consent or the
court’s leave. The court should freely give leave when justice so
requires.
Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a)(2).
The undersigned notes Plaintiffs “First Amended Complaint” (Document No. 24) filed
January 8, 2021, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 15, as well as this Court’s “Order” (Document No. 23).
It is well settled that a timely-filed amended pleading supersedes the original pleading, and that
motions directed at superseded pleadings may be denied as moot. Young v. City of Mount Ranier,
238 F.3d 567, 573 (4th Cir. 2001) (“The general rule ... is that an amended pleading supersedes
the original pleading, rendering the original pleading of no effect.”); see also, Fawzy v. Wauquiez
Boats SNC, 873 F.3d 451, 455 (4th Cir. 2017) (“Because a properly filed amended complaint
supersedes the original one and becomes the operative complaint in the case, it renders the original
complaint ‘of no effect.’”).
To the extent any Defendant contends the Amended Complaint is deficient, this Order is
without prejudice to Defendant(s) filing a renewed motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint, as
appropriate.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that “Defendant Iredell-Statesville Board Of
Education’s Motion To Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint” (Document No. 19) is DENIED AS
MOOT.
SO ORDERED.
Signed: January 11, 2021
DCm
David C. Keesler ey
United States Magistrate Judge af