“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.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. 3:22-cv-00257-MOC-DCK
SERENA EVANS, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
Vs. ) ORDER
)
CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG )
BOARD OF EDUCATION, )
)
Defendant. )
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Strike certain affirmative
defenses from Defendant’s Answer to Complaint. (Doc. No. 20). Defendant filed an Amended
Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint on November 9, 2022. (Doc. No. 27). Because Defendant’s
Amended Answer excludes the affirmative defenses Plaintiff sought to strike, the pending
Motion to Strike the original Answer is moot. See 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.”).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
(1) Plaintiff's Motion to Strike, (Doc. No. 20), is DENIED as moot.
Signed: December 13, 2022
evrnna
Max O. Cogburn i )
United States District Judge Tote t