Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Carter v. Cannedy

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


September 25, 2009

RAASHAD CARTER, PLAINTIFF,
v.
L. CANNEDY, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Clifford Wallace United States Circuit Judge

ORDER

Carter, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 26, 2009, I ruled that service was appropriate for defendants L. Cannedy and L. Cano, but not for unidentified defendants John Does #1-10. Carter's claims against John Does #1-10 were dismissed without prejudice, and the order stated that plaintiff was free to amend the complaint to include identified defendants.

On July 13, 2009, Carter filed a motion for leave to file an amended complaint to add the identities of six John Does. That motion is GRANTED. However, on July 13, 2009, Carter also submitted a document styled "Amended Complaint." This document is not adequate as an amended complaint, because it only restates those paragraphs of the original complaint that Plaintiff wishes to change. Plaintiff is informed that I cannot refer to a prior pleading in order to make plaintiff's amended complaint complete. Local Rule 15-220 requires that an amended complaint be complete in itself without reference to any prior pleading. This is because, as a general rule, an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint. See Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Once a plaintiff files an amended complaint, the original pleading no longer serves any function in the case. Therefore, in an amended complaint, as in an original complaint, each claim and the involvement of each defendant must be sufficiently alleged.

Thus, I grant Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a new amended complaint containing all of the allegations on which he wishes to proceed. Plaintiff is further informed that, although he complied with Part 5 of my June 26, 2009 order by submitting the required summonses, USM-285 forms and copies of the original complaint, I will not direct the U.S. Marshals to serve the complaint on any defendants until the Plaintiff files a new amended complaint containing all of the allegations on which he wishes to proceed. Once the new amended complaint is filed, I will screen it, and, if appropriate, will then order Plaintiff to submit further documentation in preparation for service; until then, I will not direct service on any of the defendants, including L. Cannedy and L. Cano.

20090925

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.