Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-3_24-cv-00081/USCOURTS-ared-3_24-cv-00081-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

CURTIS MORRIS PLAINTIFF 

 

V. NO. 3:24-cv-00081-JM-ERE 

JACOB WHITE and 

J.B. HOYER DEFENDANTS 

ORDER 

Pro se plaintiff Curtis Morris has filed another amended complaint, which the 

Clerk of Court properly docketed as a motion to amend his complaint.1 Doc. 15. For 

reasons that follow, the motion is denied. 

The Court has reviewed Mr. Morris’s proposed second amended complaint, 

which except for non-substantive details,2

 is identical to his first amended complaint, 

his operative pleading filed on June 12, 2024. Compare Doc. 7 and Doc. 15. 

Pursuant to Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a court should “freely 

give leave [to amend] when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(3). However, 

the Court may appropriately deny amendment of a pleading for various reasons, 

including futility of the proposed amendment. Sherman v. Winco Fireworks, Inc., 

1

 Because Mr. Morris has already filed an amended complaint in this lawsuit, he 

must request leave of court to file any additional amended complaint. FED. R. CIV. P. 

15(a)(2). 

2

 Both documents are printed by hand and allege identical facts, using the same 

words, but have different pagination. 

Case 3:24-cv-00081-JM Document 17 Filed 06/27/24 Page 1 of 2
2 

532 F.3d 709, 715 (8th Cir. 2008). Here, Mr. Morris’s proposed second amended 

complaint merely repeats allegations set forth in his first amended complaint, which 

makes the proposed pleading futile. Reuter v. Jax Ltd., Inc., 711 F.3d 918, 922 (8th 

Cir. 2013) (citations omitted) (“Duplicative and frivolous claims are futile.”). 

 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT Mr. Morris’s motion to amend (Doc. 

15) is DENIED.3

 Mr. Morris is advised that if he wishes to file a second amended 

complaint, he must file a motion seeking to do so, and he should: (1) attach to his 

motion the proposed second amended complaint; and (2) explain in the motion how 

the proposed pleading adds or changes the allegations, claims, or relief sought in the 

first amended complaint. 

 So Ordered 27 June 2024. 

 ____________________________________ 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

3

 Motions to amend are nondispositive pretrial motions, appropriately decided by a 

United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). See Daley v. Marriott 

Int’l, Inc., 415 F.3d 889, 893 n.9 (8th Cir. 2005) (designating magistrate judge’s denial of 

motion to amend as an “order denying [a] nondispositive pretrial motion”). 

Case 3:24-cv-00081-JM Document 17 Filed 06/27/24 Page 2 of 2