Hill v. Western Idaho Community Action Partnership Inc, No. 1:2009cv00217 - Document 15 (D. Idaho 2009)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER Granting Unopposed 10 First MOTION for leave to File Second Amended Complaint filed by Riley Hill. Defendant is to respond to Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint within the applicable time period outlined in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by Judge Ronald E Bush. (caused to be mailed to non Registered Participants at the addresses listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) by jm)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF IDAHO RILEY HILL, Case No CV-09-00217-REB Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER RE: vs. WESTERN IDAHO COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP, INC., an Idaho corporation, Plaintiff s Motion to Amend/Correct to File Second Amended Complaint (Docket No. 10) Defendant Currently before the Court is Plaintiff s Motion to Amend/Correct to File Second Amended Complaint (Docket No. 10). Having carefully reviewed the record and otherwise being fully advised, the Court enters the following Memorandum Decision and Order: I. BACKGROUND Plaintiff filed his Complaint on May 8, 2009. (Docket No. 1). On that same day, Plaintiff also amended his Complaint as a matter of course. (Docket No. 2). On June 3, 2009, Defendant filed its Motion to Compel Binding Arbitration and to Dismiss or Stay Proceedings ( Motion to Compel ). (Docket No. 6). On June 16, 2009, Plaintiff filed his First Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint. (Docket No. 10). Three days later, on June 19, 2009, Plaintiff opposed Defendant s Motion to Compel, arguing that his recent amendment efforts foreclosed the application of any relevant arbitration provision - the subject of Defendant s Motion to Compel. (Docket No. 11). MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 1 On July 9, 2009, Defendant provided its Notice of Withdrawal of Motion to Compel, stating: In light of Plaintiff s decision to drop in the Second Amended Complaint all claims directly based on the Valley One and Valley Two Partnership Agreements, Defendant is willing to withdraw its Motion to Compel. See p. 2 (Docket No. 12). Defendant s Motion to Compel was therefore withdrawn. Also on July 9, 2009, Defendant not surprisingly issued its Non-Opposition to Plaintiff s Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint. (Docket No. 13). Given the circumstances referenced above, judicial efficiency, coupled with saved costs to the parties, combine to warrant the granting of Plaintiff s unopposed First Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint (Docket No. 10). II. ORDER Based on the FOREGOING, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff s unopposed First Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint (Docket No. 10) is hereby GRANTED. Defendant is to respond to Plaintiff s Second Amended Complaint within the applicable time period outlined in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. DATED: July 13, 2009 Honorable Ronald E. Bush U. S. Magistrate Judge MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER - 2
]]>
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.
