Parady v. Tampa Steel Erecting Co.

Full title: ADRIENNE PARADY, Plaintiff, v. TAMPA STEEL ERECTING CO., KENNETH JOHNSON…

Court: United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division

Date published: Jan 25, 2008

CASE NO: 8:07-cv-335-T-26TGW (M.D. Fla. Jan. 25, 2008)

Opinion

CASE NO: 8:07-cv-335-T-26TGW.

January 25, 2008

ORDER

RICHARD LAZZARA, District Judge

Before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint. Because Defendants' pending motions to dismiss do not constitute responsive pleadings within the meaning of Rule 15(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and because this is the first amended complaint which Plaintiff seeks to file, it would be error for the Court to deny the motion under established Eleventh Circuit precedent. See Fortner v. Thomas, 983 F.2d 1024, 1032 (11^th Cir. 1993) (and cases cited) (holding that district court committed error in denying appellants' motion to amend complaint where appellees had only filed a motion to dismiss and appellants had not previously amended their complaint). Consequently, the Court needs no response from Defendants.

Accordingly, it is ordered and adjudged as follows:

1) Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint (Dkt. 29) is granted.

2) Plaintiff shall file an amended complaint on or before February 7, 2008.

3) Defendants shall file their responses to the amended complaint within 10 days of service.

4) Defendant's pending Motions to Dismiss (Dkts. 22 and 24) are denied as moot.

DONE AND ORDERED at Tampa, Florida.