From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. Kelly

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Oct 10, 2007
CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-10999 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 10, 2007)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-10999.

October 10, 2007


ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO AMEND AND DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS


Plaintiff, while incarcerated at the Parr Highway Correctional Facility (ATF) in Adrian, Michigan was allowed to proceed in forma pauperis and filed the instant Complaint, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, on March 8, 2007, against four ATF prison officials, alleging that they had violated his federal constitutional rights as a result of various actions taken by them in connection with his incarceration. Plaintiff sought compensatory and punitive damages.

Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at the Florence Crane Correctional Facility in Coldwater, Michigan.

Plaintiff filed a Motion for Leave to file an Amended Complaint on August 15, 2007, to add new parties defendant. Since the Defendants have not filed a responsive pleading to date, the Motion to Amend is GRANTED AND Plaintiff is ORDERED to file his Amended Complaint on or before October 22, 2007. The Amended Complaint must contain a concise statement alleging a violation by each defendant of a right secured by the federal constitution or laws, and that the deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law. Plaintiff must allege sufficient material facts to support the inference that each defendant government official has violated a constitutional right.

Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, filed on August 24, 2007, based on a failure to state a claim, is hereby DENIED, because the Complaint to which it is directed has been superseded by an Amended Complaint. Once the Amended Complaint has been filed with the court, the Clerk is ordered to mail Plaintiff copies of summons so that he can effectuate service on the defendants.

Once service is completed, the Defendants will be allowed 30 days to file a responsive pleading. If the case survives summary disposition, the Court will facilitate a telephonic conference call for the purpose of allowing the parties to provide a Final Pretrial Order to the Court.


Summaries of

Williams v. Kelly

United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Oct 10, 2007
CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-10999 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 10, 2007)
Case details for

Williams v. Kelly

Case Details

Full title:QURTIS WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. WILLIAM KELLY, et. al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division

Date published: Oct 10, 2007

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-10999 (E.D. Mich. Oct. 10, 2007)

Citing Cases

Wright v. Memphis Light, Gas & Water Div.

B &H Medical, L.L.C. v. ABP Admin., Inc., 526 F.3d 257, 268 (6th Cir. 2008). E.g., Pinks v. Lowe's Home…

Simpson v. G4S Secure Solution (Usa), Inc.

B & H Med, L.L.C. v. ABP Admin., Inc., 526 F.3d 257, 268 (6th Cir. 2008). E.g., Pinks v. Lowe's Home Ctrs.,…