Hughes v. Oklahoma State of

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma
DecidedFebruary 3, 2022
Docket5:21-cv-01094
StatusUnknown

This text of Hughes v. Oklahoma State of (Hughes v. Oklahoma State of) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hughes v. Oklahoma State of, (W.D. Okla. 2022).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

JACKIE HUGHES and ANGELA ) HAWKINS, individually and as Next ) Friends of D.H., S.H., Sk.H., and I.H., ) minor children, et al., ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) -vs- ) Case No. CIV-21-1094-F ) STATE OF OKLAHOMA, ex rel. ) THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN ) SERVICES, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER The court is in receipt of the Second Amended Complaint (doc. no. 10), filed January 31, 2022. Prior to removal from state court, a first amended petition was filed as of right in state court. See, doc. no. 1-4. As such, plaintiffs may not file a second amended complaint in this court without first obtaining either written consent of the opposing parties or leave of court. See, Williams v. Homesite Insurance Company of the Midwest, 2020 WL 9209708, at *1 (E.D. Penn. June 25, 2020) (plaintiff cannot file second amended complaint as of right pursuant to Rule 15(a)(1), Fed. R. Civ. P., having filed a first amended complaint in state court prior to removal) (citing cases). In any event, the Second Amended Complaint was not filed within the 21-day period prescribed by Rule 15(a)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. Outside that prescribed period, the Second Amended Complaint required either written consent of the opposing parties or leave of court.! See, Rule 15(a)(2), Fed. R. Civ. P. Therefore, the Second Amended Complaint is STRICKEN without prejudice to refiling upon written consent of the opposing parties or leave of court. Absent written consent or leave of court for plaintiffs to file a Second Amended Complaint, plaintiffs’ responses to the pending motions to dismiss are due not later than February 18, 2022. IT IS SO ORDERED this 3" day of February, 2022.

STEPHEN P. [_prit = UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

21-1094p002.docx

‘On November 18, 2021, the court granted plaintiffs leave to respond to defendants’ motions to dismiss that were to be filed on December 15, 2021, by January 31, 2022, but, in doing so, did not grant plaintiffs leave to file a second amended complaint by January 31, 2022. See, doc. no. 5.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Hughes v. Oklahoma State of, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hughes-v-oklahoma-state-of-okwd-2022.