Turner v. Ralkey

W.D. Washington

Turner v. Ralkey

DecidedJune 17, 2020

Docket3:20-cv-05472

StatusUnknown

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

Bluebook

Turner v. Ralkey, (W.D. Wash. 2020).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 9 10 Victor Julian Turner aka Mikailah Kay Sweetgrass-Turner, CASE NO. 3:20-cv-05472-BHS-DWC 11 Plaintiff, ORDER 12 v. 13 Tori Ralkey et al., 14 Defendants. 15

16 Plaintiff Victor Julian Turner aka Mikailah Kay Sweetgrass-Turner, proceeding pro se and 17 in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Presently pending 18 before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend (Dkt. 7), which the Court grants as a matter of 19 course. 20 A. Background 21 On May 19, 2020, Plaintiff initiated this lawsuit by filing a Motion to Proceed In Forma 22 Pauperis (“IFP”) and the Complaint. See Dkts. 1, 5, 6, 7. The Court granted the Motion to 23 Proceed IFP on June 16, 2020. Dkt. 6. The same day, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Amend. Dkt. 7. 24 1 B. Motion to Amend (Dkt. 7) 2 Pursuant to Rule 15(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 3 A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within: (A) 21 days after serving it, or 4 (B) if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service 5 of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.

6 Plaintiff filed his Motion to Amend (Dkt. 7) prior to service and prior to the filing of a 7 responsive pleading. See Dkt. Therefore, Plaintiff has the right to file an amended complaint as a 8 matter of course. “When the plaintiff has the right to file an amended complaint as a matter of 9 course, [ ] the plain language of Rule 15(a) shows that the court lacks the discretion to reject the 10 amended complaint based on its alleged futility.” Thomas v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 2007 WL 11 2140917, * 2 (N.D. Cal. July 25, 2007) (quoting Williams v. Board of Regents of University 12 System of Georgia, 477 F.3d 1282, 1292 n. 6 (11th Cir. 2007)). Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion 13 to Amend (Dkt. 7) is granted. The Clerk is directed to docket the proposed amended complaint 14 (Dkt. 7-1) as the amended complaint. 15 Dated this 17th day of June, 2020. 16 17 A David W. Christel 18 United States Magistrate Judge 19 20 21 22 23 24

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

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 9 10 Victor Julian Turner aka Mikailah Kay Sweetgrass-Turner, CASE NO. 3:20-cv-05472-BHS-DWC 11 Plaintiff, ORDER 12 v. 13 Tori Ralkey et al., 14 Defendants. 15

16 Plaintiff Victor Julian Turner aka Mikailah Kay Sweetgrass-Turner, proceeding pro se and 17 in forma pauperis, filed this civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Presently pending 18 before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend (Dkt. 7), which the Court grants as a matter of 19 course. 20 A. Background 21 On May 19, 2020, Plaintiff initiated this lawsuit by filing a Motion to Proceed In Forma 22 Pauperis (“IFP”) and the Complaint. See Dkts. 1, 5, 6, 7. The Court granted the Motion to 23 Proceed IFP on June 16, 2020. Dkt. 6. The same day, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Amend. Dkt. 7. 24 1 B. Motion to Amend (Dkt. 7) 2 Pursuant to Rule 15(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 3 A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within: (A) 21 days after serving it, or 4 (B) if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service 5 of a motion under Rule 12(b), (e), or (f), whichever is earlier.

6 Plaintiff filed his Motion to Amend (Dkt. 7) prior to service and prior to the filing of a 7 responsive pleading. See Dkt. Therefore, Plaintiff has the right to file an amended complaint as a 8 matter of course. “When the plaintiff has the right to file an amended complaint as a matter of 9 course, [ ] the plain language of Rule 15(a) shows that the court lacks the discretion to reject the 10 amended complaint based on its alleged futility.” Thomas v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 2007 WL 11 2140917, * 2 (N.D. Cal. July 25, 2007) (quoting Williams v. Board of Regents of University 12 System of Georgia, 477 F.3d 1282, 1292 n. 6 (11th Cir. 2007)). Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion 13 to Amend (Dkt. 7) is granted. The Clerk is directed to docket the proposed amended complaint 14 (Dkt. 7-1) as the amended complaint. 15 Dated this 17th day of June, 2020. 16 17 A David W. Christel 18 United States Magistrate Judge 19 20 21 22 23 24

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Turner v. Ralkey, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/turner-v-ralkey-wawd-2020.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack