Ramirez v. County of San Bernardino, No. 13-56602 (9th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Plaintiff appealed the district court’s dismissal of his civil rights complaint and the subsequent denial of his motion to reconsider that dismissal. At issue was whether Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 15(a) required plaintiff, who filed his First Amended Complaint with consent of the opposing party, to seek leave of court before filing his Second Amended Complaint. The court found that Rule 15(a) does not impose any such timing mechanism and therefore held that plaintiff was permitted to file his Second Amended Complaint “as a matter of course,” without seeking leave of court. Because the timely filed Second Amended Complaint mooted the motion to dismiss, the court reversed the district court’s grant of defendants’ motion to dismiss the superseded First Amended Complaint and the resulting dismissal of plaintiff’s case. The court remanded for further proceedings.
Court Description: Civil Procedure. The panel reversed the district court’s dismissal of a civil rights complaint and remanded for further proceedings. The panel held that plaintiff was not required, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), to seek leave of court before filing his Second Amended Complaint. The panel held that Rule 15(a) does not impose any particular timing mechanism governing the order in which amendments must be made. Because plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint, filed with consent of the opposing party, complied with Rule 15(a)(2) as an “other amendment,” plaintiff was permitted to file a timely Second Amended Complaint “as a matter of course” under Rule 15(a)(1), without seeking leave of court. Accordingly, the panel reversed the district court’s refusal to recognize the Second Amended Complaint. Because the timely filed Second Amended Complaint mooted the pending motion to dismiss, the panel reversed the district court’s grant RAMIREZ V. CTY. OF SAN BERNARDINO 3 of defendants’ motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint and the resulting dismissal of the plaintiff’s case.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.