(PS) Narayan v. County of Sacramento

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJuly 1, 20202:19-cv-00466California379 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 PRAKASH NARAYAN, No. 2:19-cv-00466-TLN-CKD (PS) Plaintiff, v. ORDER COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., Defendants. 16 17 Presently before the court is defendants’ objection to plaintiff’s second amended complaint. (ECF No. 78.) On June 15, 2020, plaintiff, without leave of court and without written consent from defendants, filed a document entitled “Second Amended Complaint.” (ECF No. 77.) Defendants move to strike plaintiff’s filing. (ECF No. 78.) A party may amend a pleading once “as a matter of course” within 21 days after serving it or within 21 days after service of a Rule 12 motion, whichever occurs earlier. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1). After the time for amendment as a matter of course has expired, a plaintiff may amend a complaint only by obtaining the court’s permission or the adverse party’s written consent. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). If a plaintiff files his or her amended complaint without leave of court…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.