Legal Opinion
Rosenblatt v. Fenty
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided August 26, 2010No. Civil Action 09-1469PublishedCited by 33 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM ORDER
RICHARD W. ROBERTS, District Judge.
The Scheduling Order was entered at a time after the plaintiff had already filed two amended complaints. Since any further amendments to the complaint had to be made by motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), the Scheduling Order set a deadline of May 27, 2010 for any further motion to amend the complaint. On May 27, 2010 and June 7, 2010, the plaintiff improperly filed a third amended complaint and a corrected third amended complaint, respectively, neither accompanied by any motion for leave to amend. Rather than striking the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Csx Transportation, Inc. v. Commercial Union Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1996
- Bonaccorsy v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
- Felter v. SalazarDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2010
3Cited by33 opinions
- Mullen v. Bureau of PrisonsDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
- Kone v. District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
- Beattie v. BarnhartDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
- Fox v. Government of the District of ColumbiaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
- Carter-El v. District of Columbia Department of CorrectionsDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2012
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.