Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00799/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-00799-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

TIM HARDY and DARLENE HARDY, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

COUNTY OF EL DORADO, DEPUTY 

SHERIFF DAVID COOK, TONY’S TOW, 

BONANZA AUTO DISMANTLERS, and 

DOES 1 through 50, 

 Defendants. 

 /

No. Civ. S-07-799 RRB EFB 

Memorandum of Opinion

and Order

 Before the court is Plaintiffs’ ex parte application for an 

order shortening time to hear Plaintiffs’ motion to amend the 

Complaint, including Plaintiffs’ proposed request for leave to 

amend the Complaint. After thoroughly considering the 

application and the affidavit submitted in support thereof: 

 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: Plaintiffs are entitled to amend 

their Complaint pursuant to Rule 15(a). Under Rule 15(a), 

Plaintiffs are entitled to amend their Complaint “as a matter of 

1

Case 2:07-cv-00799-JAM-EFB Document 28 Filed 11/02/07 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

course” as to defendants County of El Dorado and Deputy David 

Cook because these defendants have not filed a responsive 

pleading (i.e., answer). See Allstate, Inc. v. Hecht, 65 F.3d 

1523, 1530 (9th Cir. 1995); Doe v. United States, 58 F.3d 494, 

497 (9th Cir. 1995) (neither the filing or granting of a motion 

to dismiss terminates the right to amend once as a matter of 

course before a responsive pleading is due). With respect to 

defendant Bonanza Auto Dismantlers, who filed a responsive 

pleading, the court, after thoroughly considering Plaintiffs’ 

request for leave to amend the Complaint (Docket at 25), 

concludes that leave to amend is proper. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 

15(a) (“leave shall be freely given when justice so requires.”). 

 The hearing on the motion to dismiss presently scheduled 

for November 7, 2007, shall be continued to December 5, 2007, at 

10:00 a.m. Defendants County of El Dorado and Deputy Cook are 

directed to amend their motion to dismiss so that it addresses 

the amended Complaint. The briefing schedule for this motion 

shall be adjusted to the new hearing date as follows: the moving 

papers are due on November 9, 2007, the opposition November 21, 

2007, and the reply November 28, 2007. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

ENTERED this 1st day of November, 2007. 

 s/RALPH R. BEISTLINE 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

Case 2:07-cv-00799-JAM-EFB Document 28 Filed 11/02/07 Page 2 of 2