Garry D. Gibbs v. City of Sikeston, et al.

E.D. Missouri

Garry D. Gibbs v. City of Sikeston, et al.

DecidedMarch 9, 2026

Docket1:26-cv-00003

StatusUnknown

This text of Garry D. Gibbs v. City of Sikeston, et al. (Garry D. Gibbs v. City of Sikeston, et al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Garry D. Gibbs v. City of Sikeston, et al., (E.D. Mo. 2026).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION

GARRY D. GIBBS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) vs. ) Case No. 1:26-cv-00003-SNLJ ) CITY OF SIKESTON, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint [Doc. 13]. Amendments to a pleading are governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15. An amended pleading encompasses matters that transpired prior to the initiation of the lawsuit; a supplemental pleading encompasses matters that occurred subsequent to the filing of the lawsuit and pertain to the original cause. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(d); United States v. Vorachek, 563 F.2d 884, 886 (8th Cir. 1977). “[A]n amended complaint supercedes an original complaint and renders the original complaint without legal effect.” In re Atlas Van Lines, Inc., 209 F.3d 1064, 1067 (8th Cir. 2000). Consequently, an amended complaint must encompass all allegations and claims that a plaintiff intends to assert. Plaintiff did not submit a proposed amended complaint with his motion; instead, he submitted five “supplemental statement[s]”–one for each count of the original complaint [Doc. 12]. It is clear that he is attempting to amend his complaint in a piecemeal manner, which is not permitted. Plaintiff’s pro se status does not exempt him from complying with substantive and procedural law. Burgs v. Sissel, 745 F.2d 526, 528 (8th Cir.1984) (per curiam). The motion to amend will be denied for failure to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 and Local Rule 4.07, and the supplemental pleadings will be stricken. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint [Doc. 13] is DENIED and the supplemental pleadings [Doc. 12] are STRICKEN from the record. SO ORDERED this 9th day of March, 2025.

STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, “ SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION

GARRY D. GIBBS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) vs. ) Case No. 1:26-cv-00003-SNLJ ) CITY OF SIKESTON, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint [Doc. 13]. Amendments to a pleading are governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15. An amended pleading encompasses matters that transpired prior to the initiation of the lawsuit; a supplemental pleading encompasses matters that occurred subsequent to the filing of the lawsuit and pertain to the original cause. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(d); United States v. Vorachek, 563 F.2d 884, 886 (8th Cir. 1977). “[A]n amended complaint supercedes an original complaint and renders the original complaint without legal effect.” In re Atlas Van Lines, Inc., 209 F.3d 1064, 1067 (8th Cir. 2000). Consequently, an amended complaint must encompass all allegations and claims that a plaintiff intends to assert. Plaintiff did not submit a proposed amended complaint with his motion; instead, he submitted five “supplemental statement[s]”–one for each count of the original complaint [Doc. 12]. It is clear that he is attempting to amend his complaint in a piecemeal manner, which is not permitted. Plaintiff’s pro se status does not exempt him from complying with substantive and procedural law. Burgs v. Sissel, 745 F.2d 526, 528 (8th Cir.1984) (per curiam). The motion to amend will be denied for failure to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 and Local Rule 4.07, and the supplemental pleadings will be stricken. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint [Doc. 13] is DENIED and the supplemental pleadings [Doc. 12] are STRICKEN from the record. SO ORDERED this 9th day of March, 2025.

STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, “ SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Garry D. Gibbs v. City of Sikeston, et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garry-d-gibbs-v-city-of-sikeston-et-al-moed-2026.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack