Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Round v. The Majestic Star Casino, LLC

United States District Court, N.D. Indiana, Hammond Division

November 21, 2017

LATRICE ROUND, Plaintiff,
v.
THE MAJESTIC STAR CASINO, LLC, Defendant.

          OPINION AND ORDER

          PAUL R. CHERRY, MAGISTRATE JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT.

         This matter is before the Court on Defendant's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint at Law [DE 37], filed by Defendant The Majestic Start Casino, LLC on September 19, 2017. Plaintiff has not filed a response, and the time to do so has passed.

         BACKGROUND

         On November 24, 2015, Plaintiff filed a pro se Complaint with this Court. On November 25, 2015, the Court entered an Order striking Plaintiff's Complaint because it was “legally deficient, ” and granted Plaintiff until December 23, 2015, to file an Amended Complaint. On December 22, 2015, Plaintiff filed pro se an Amended Employment Discrimination Complaint alleging a violation of her Eighth Amendment Rights. Therein, she alleges lack of accommodations or treatment for work injuries on December 9, 2013, and December 14, 2014, and an “unsecure” work area.

         On April 7, 2016, the parties attended a pretrial conference and the Court entered a Scheduling Order, including a deadline to amend pleadings of April 15, 2016, and a discovery deadline of October 21, 2016. Subsequently, the parties exchanged written discovery and, on October 11, 2016, Defendant took Plaintiff's deposition. At her deposition, Plaintiff confirmed that her claim against Defendant in this lawsuit is that Defendant subjected her to cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

         On March 17, 2017, Defendant filed a Notice of Intent to File a Rule 56 Motion, as required by the Court. On March 20, 2017, the Court ordered the parties to a settlement conference prior to the filing of a Rule 56 motion. The settlement conference was scheduled for May 23, 2017; Defendant appeared, but Plaintiff failed to appear. The Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause as to why she failed to appear. On June 2, 2017, Plaintiff filed an affidavit indicating that she failed to appear on May 23, 2017, because she was not aware of the settlement conference. On June 7, 2017, the Court rescheduled the settlement conference for June 26, 2017. The settlement conference was held, but settlement was not reached.

         At the end of the conference, Plaintiff requested to amend her Amended Complaint. The Court granted Plaintiff until July 31, 2017 to file a Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint. On July 26, 2017, Plaintiff filed an Affidavit asking for additional time to file the motion, which the Court granted on August 3, 2017, extending the deadline to File a Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint to September 1, 2017.

         On September 1, 2017, Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint [ECF 36] without first filing a Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint as ordered by the Court.

         ANALYSIS

         In the instant Motion to Strike, Defendant asks the Court to strike the Second Amended Complaint for failure to obtain leave of Court and also asks the Court to not grant any additional time to file such a motion.

         Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governs amendments to pleadings and provides, in part:

(1) Amending as a Matter of Course. A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within:
(A) 21 days after serving it, or
(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 of a motion under Rule ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.