Harris v. Bradley, Arkansas

• Court: District Court, W.D. Arkansas
• Decided: January 16, 2020
• Docket: 4:19-cv-04145
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS TEXARKANA DIVISION

PATRICIA HARRIS PLAINTIFF

v. Case No. 4:19-cv-4145

CITY OF BRADLEY, ARKANSAS DEFENDANT

ORDER Before the Court is Defendant City of Bradley, Arkansas’ Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 6). On December 31, 2019, Defendant moved for dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). On January 14, 2020, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint. (ECF No. 8). The Court finds this matter ripe for consideration. It is well established that filing an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint, thereby rendering it inoperative and without legal effect. See In re Atlas Van Lines, Inc., 209 F.3d 1064, 1067 (8th Cir. 2000). Accordingly, after a complaint is amended, motions directed at the original complaint should be denied as moot, without prejudice to their refiling as to the amended complaint. Pure Country, Inc. v. Sigma Chi Fraternity, 312 F.3d 952, 956 (8th Cir. 2002). Plaintiff’s original complaint (ECF No. 2) is now inoperative and superseded by the amended complaint. Accordingly, the Court finds that the pending Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 6), which is directed at the original complaint, is moot and hereby is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 16th day of January, 2020. /s/ Susan O. Hickey Susan O. Hickey Chief United States District Judge