BMO Harris Bank NA v. American National Bank
This text of BMO Harris Bank NA v. American National Bank (BMO Harris Bank NA v. American National Bank) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Wisconsin primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
BMO HARRIS BANK NA,
Plaintiff,
v. Case No. 20-C-546
SCOTT BERKOVITZ, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT
Plaintiff BMO Harris Bank NA commenced this action on April 2, 2020. Defendants M.R.C. Leasing, Inc. and Michael Chizek subsequently filed a motion to dismiss all claims against Defendant Michael Chizek pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) on April 22, 2020. Dkt. No. 27. After filing a response opposing this motion, Plaintiff moved the court for leave to file an amended complaint on May 14, 2020. Dkt. No. 45. The court granted Plaintiff’s motion for leave after no objection to its request was filed, making Plaintiff’s amended complaint the controlling pleading. Dkt. No. 48. The filing of an amended complaint generally renders moot any pending motion to dismiss. See, e.g., Lim v. Central DuPage Hosp., 972 F.2d 758, 762 (7th Cir. 1992) (noting trial judge’s denial of a pending motion to dismiss as moot in light of an amended complaint); Johnson v. Dossey, 515 F.3d 778, 780 (7th Cir. 2008) (“When an amended complaint is filed, the prior pleading is withdrawn and the amended pleading is controlling.”). Accordingly, the pending motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 27) will be DENIED as moot. SO ORDERED at Green Bay, Wisconsin this 16th day of June, 2020. s/ William C. Griesbach
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
BMO Harris Bank NA v. American National Bank, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bmo-harris-bank-na-v-american-national-bank-wied-2020.