Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02322/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02322-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 110
Nature of Suit: Insurance
Cause of Action: 28:1446 Breach of Contract- Insurance

---

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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

LAMBERT MILLS,

Plaintiff,

v.

BANKERS LIFE AND CASUALTY 

COMPANy,

Defendant.

No. 2:14-cv-2322 MCE CKD PS

ORDER

Plaintiff has filed a first amended complaint. Plaintiff seeks to add a claim for punitive 

damages because of the questions asked by defense counsel during plaintiff’s deposition. The 

first amended complaint is deficient in several respects. 

The first amended complaint is not complete in that the claims pled in the original 

complaint are not incorporated into the amended complaint. Plaintiff is informed that the court 

cannot refer to a prior pleading in order to make plaintiff’s amended complaint complete. Local 

Rule 15-220 requires that an amended complaint be complete in itself without reference to any 

prior pleading. This is because, as a general rule, an amended complaint supersedes the original 

complaint. See Loux v. Rhay, 375 F.2d 55, 57 (9th Cir. 1967). Once plaintiff files an amended 

complaint, the original pleading no longer serves any function in the case. Therefore, in an 

/////

Case 2:14-cv-02322-MCE-CKD Document 30 Filed 01/11/16 Page 1 of 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

2

amended complaint, as in an original complaint, each claim and the involvement of each 

defendant must be sufficiently alleged. 

The filing of the amended complaint is also in violation of the scheduling order (ECF No. 

23) which allows for amendment of the pleadings only with leave of court. The amended 

complaint is also untimely under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a). Finally, it appears that 

the questions about which plaintiff complains are well within the scope of appropriate deposition 

inquiry and do not give rise to a claim for punitive damages.

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s first amended 

complaint (ECF No. 29) is stricken.

Dated: January 11, 2016

4 mills2322.fac.stk

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:14-cv-02322-MCE-CKD Document 30 Filed 01/11/16 Page 2 of 2