Roscoe Prosser v. Stam Express and Paul Laskaris

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA VALDOSTA DIVISION ROSCOE PROSSER, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : CASE NO.: 7:25-CV-00020 (WLS) : STAM EXPRESS and PAUL LASKARIS, : : Defendants. : : ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend Pleadings (Doc. 21), filed on March 9, 2026, and pursuant to the Court’s previous Order (Doc. 20). Therein, Plaintiff seeks leave to file a second amended complaint, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2).

Previously, Defendants Stam Express and Paul Laskaris filed a Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 14) on Plaintiff’s claims for negligent hiring, training, and supervision, punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees. In response to the motion, Plaintiff unilaterally dismissed those claims. (Doc. 19). The Court determined that the proper method of dismissing these claims was the filing of an amended complaint, rather than dismissal in response to a motion for summary judgment. (See Doc. 20). Thus, the Court ordered Plaintiff to move to file a second amended complaint which would remove the claims for negligent hiring, training, and supervision, punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees within seven days of the Court’s Order. (See id.) Plaintiff timely filed the instant Motion for Leave to Amend.

Under Rule 15(a)(2), after the period in which a pleading may be amended as a matter of course, a party may amend a pleading only by leave of the Court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2).

A court “should freely give leave when justice so requires.” Id. The Court finds that leave to amend is appropriate here. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion (Doc. 21) is GRANTED. The Clerk is DIRECTED to file Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint, which is attached to the instant Motion, on the Record.

Additionally, Plaintiff’s claims for negligent hiring, training, and supervision, punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees having now been properly dismissed, Defendants’ Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 14) as to those claims is DENIED, as moot. See, e.g., Dresdner Bank AG v. M/V Olympia Voyager, 463 F.3d 1210, 1215 (11th Cir. 2006) (holding that an amended complaint supersedes the previous pleading).

Further, the Motion for Partial Summary Judgment having been denied as moot, this matter is ready for trial. Therefore, the trial in this matter is noticed for the Valdosta Division May 2026 trial term to begin on Monday, May 4, 2026. A separate Order or notice to prepare a proposed pretrial order will be issued by the Court.

SO ORDERED, this 11th day of March 2026. /s/ W. Louis Sands W. LOUIS SANDS, SR. JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT