Paul T. Mak v. Theodore R. Dunham Jr., et al.
This text of Paul T. Mak v. Theodore R. Dunham Jr., et al. (Paul T. Mak v. Theodore R. Dunham Jr., et al.) 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.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA ) PAUL T. MAK, ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-24-248-SLP THEODORE R. DUNHAM JR., ) et al., Defendants. ) ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff Paul T. Mak’s Motion to Dismiss Defendant Theodore R. Dunham Jr.’s (“Defendant’s”) counterclaims [Doc. No. 34]. Subsequent to the filing of Plaintiff’s Motion, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint [Doc. No. 39] and Defendant filed an Answer and Amended Counterclaim [Doc. No. 43]. The Amended Counterclaim, which is now the operative document, supersedes the allegations contained in the original Counterclaim. See May v. Segovia, 929 F.3d 1223, 1229 (10th Cir. 2019). Thus, those allegations are of “no legal effect.” Davis v. TXO Prod. Corp., 929 F.2d 1515, 1517 (10th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 34] is DENIED AS MOOT. IT IS SO ORDERED this 21st day of October, 2025.
SCOTT L. PALK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Paul T. Mak v. Theodore R. Dunham Jr., et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paul-t-mak-v-theodore-r-dunham-jr-et-al-okwd-2025.