Powers v. Arizona, State of

D. Arizona

Powers v. Arizona, State of

DecidedAugust 19, 2025

Docket2:24-cv-00018

StatusUnknown

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

Bluebook

Powers v. Arizona, State of, (D. Ariz. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Edmund Powers, No. CV-24-00018-PHX-KML (JZB)

10 Plaintiff, ORDER

11 v.

12 State of Arizona, et al.,

13 Defendants. 14 15 On October 17, 2024, plaintiff Edmund Powers, represented by counsel, filed a 16 motion to amend the complaint. (Doc. 33.) Defendants did not file an opposition but 17 Powers died before the court could rule on the motion. (Doc. 38.) Kelle Powers Smith now 18 seeks to be substituted as plaintiff because she is the personal representative of the Edmund 19 Powers Estate. (Doc. 48.) Smith also requests the motion to amend be reinstated. (Doc. 20 48.) Smith is substituted and the motion to amend is reinstated. 21 Defendants did not oppose the motion to amend and it is summarily granted. Local 22 Rule 7.2(i). Because the amended complaint will be filed by a non-prisoner, it will not be 23 subject to the screening requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. See Olivas v. Nevada ex rel. 24 Dep’t of Corr., 856 F.3d 1281, 1284 (9th Cir. 2017) (“a court may screen a complaint 25 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A only if, at the time the plaintiff files the complaint, he is [a 26 prisoner]”). Defendants must respond to the amended complaint within the deadline 27 established by rule. 28 IT IS ORDERED the Motion to Substitute (Doc. 48) is GRANTED. Kelle Powers || Smith is SUBSTITUTED in place of Edmund Powers as plaintiff in this matter and the Motion to Amend (Doc. 33) is REINSTATED. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Motion to Amend (Doc. 33) is GRANTED. 4|| Plaintiff shall file a clean copy of the First Amended Complaint within five days of this 5 || order. Defendants shall respond to the amended complaint by the deadline established by 6|| rule. This matter remains referred to Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyle pursuant to Rules 72.1 and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for all pretrial proceedings as 8 || authorized under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 9 Dated this 19th day of August, 2025. 10

Honorable Krissa M. Lanham 13 United States District Judge 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

-2-

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

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Edmund Powers, No. CV-24-00018-PHX-KML (JZB)

10 Plaintiff, ORDER

11 v.

12 State of Arizona, et al.,

13 Defendants. 14 15 On October 17, 2024, plaintiff Edmund Powers, represented by counsel, filed a 16 motion to amend the complaint. (Doc. 33.) Defendants did not file an opposition but 17 Powers died before the court could rule on the motion. (Doc. 38.) Kelle Powers Smith now 18 seeks to be substituted as plaintiff because she is the personal representative of the Edmund 19 Powers Estate. (Doc. 48.) Smith also requests the motion to amend be reinstated. (Doc. 20 48.) Smith is substituted and the motion to amend is reinstated. 21 Defendants did not oppose the motion to amend and it is summarily granted. Local 22 Rule 7.2(i). Because the amended complaint will be filed by a non-prisoner, it will not be 23 subject to the screening requirement of 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. See Olivas v. Nevada ex rel. 24 Dep’t of Corr., 856 F.3d 1281, 1284 (9th Cir. 2017) (“a court may screen a complaint 25 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A only if, at the time the plaintiff files the complaint, he is [a 26 prisoner]”). Defendants must respond to the amended complaint within the deadline 27 established by rule. 28 IT IS ORDERED the Motion to Substitute (Doc. 48) is GRANTED. Kelle Powers || Smith is SUBSTITUTED in place of Edmund Powers as plaintiff in this matter and the Motion to Amend (Doc. 33) is REINSTATED. 3 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the Motion to Amend (Doc. 33) is GRANTED. 4|| Plaintiff shall file a clean copy of the First Amended Complaint within five days of this 5 || order. Defendants shall respond to the amended complaint by the deadline established by 6|| rule. This matter remains referred to Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyle pursuant to Rules 72.1 and 72.2 of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure for all pretrial proceedings as 8 || authorized under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 9 Dated this 19th day of August, 2025. 10

Honorable Krissa M. Lanham 13 United States District Judge 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

-2-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Powers v. Arizona, State of, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/powers-v-arizona-state-of-azd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack