The opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
EASTERN DIVISION
D.R., et al., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. ) CIVIL ACT. NO. 3:22CV560-ECM
) (wo)
TALLAPOOSA COUNTY BOARD )
OF EDUCATION, et al., )
)
Defendants. )
ORDER
Now pending before the Court are the Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a second
amended complaint (doc. 43), and two motions to dismiss the amended complaint (doc. 32
& 34). Contemporaneously with the motion to amend, the Plaintiffs have filed a second
amended complaint. (Doc. 44).
Generally, leave to amend should be “freely given when justice so requires.” FED.
R. CIV. P. 15(a). Rule 15(a) does not require an amendment where “there has been undue
delay in filing, bad faith or dilatory motives, prejudice to the opposing parties,” or where
the amendment would be futile. Local 472 of United Ass'n of Journeymen & Apprentices
of Plumbing & Pipefitting v. Ga. Power Co., 684 F.2d 721, 724 (11th Cir. 1982).
The Plaintiffs represent in their motion that amendments are needed to clarify some
of their factual allegations and claims. The Plaintiffs also contend that the second amended
complaint relates back to the original pleading. Presumably, the Plaintiffs realized that
amendment was needed in light of the grounds for dismissal advanced in the pending
motions to dismiss the second amended complaint.
It appears to the Court that the most prudent course is to allow the Plaintiffs to clarify
their facts and claims, without foreclosing any defenses the Defendants may have to the
second amended complaint. Consequently, it is hereby
ORDERED that the motion for leave to file a second amended complaint (doc. 43)
is GRANTED.
It is further ORDERED that the motions to dismiss (doc. 32 & 34), which are
directed to the previously filed amended complaint, are DENIED as moot.
DONE this 17th day of February, 2023.
/s/ Emily C. Marks
EMILY C. MARKS
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2