Andrew James Swetland v. Collin County, Texas

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SHERMAN DIVISION ANDREW JAMES SWETLAND, § #407806 § § v. § CIVIL NO. 4:25-CV-00785-BD § COLLIN COUNTY, TEXAS § MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pro se plaintiff Andrew James Swetland filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Dkt. 1. On September 19, 2025, the court issued a memorandum opinion and order, Dkt. 9, dismissing Swetland’s case without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to comply with the court’s order to pay an initial partial filing fee of $25.20.

On October 22, 2025, Swetland filed a motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). Dkt. 10. He asserted that he was prevented from timely paying the initial partial filing fee because of “mail delivery delays” at the Collin County Detention Facility and that he had asked the facility “to pay the assigned initial partial filing fee.” Id. at 1, 2. On November 4, 2025, when the court still had not yet received any fees in this case, the court entered a memorandum opinion and order, Dkt. 14, denying the Rule 60(b) motion, subject to reconsideration upon receipt of the initial partial filing fee of $25.20 within 30 days.

Six days later, the court received the initial partial filing fee of $25.20, so reconsideration is warranted. The court will grant the Rule 60(b) motion, Dkt. 10, vacate its previous memorandum opinion and order, Dkt. 9, and return the case to the active docket.

Swetland has also filed a motion for leave to file a supplemental complaint, Dkt. 11, along with a handwritten supplemental complaint, Dkt. 12. The court does not consider complaints through piecemeal litigation. The court will allow Swetland to file an amended complaint on a standard § 1983 form. Swetland should be careful to include all claims he wishes to raise in the amended complaint, as an amended complaint entirely supersedes and takes the place of an original complaint. Clark v. Tarrant County, 798 F.2d 736, 740 (5th Cir. 1986).

It is ORDERED that Swetland’s Rule 60(b) motion, Dkt. 10, is GRANTED. The clerk of court is ORDERED to VACATE the memorandum opinion and order, Dkt. 9, entered on September 19, 2025, and restore this case to the active docket.

It is also ORDERED that Swetland’s motion for leave to file a supplemental complaint, Dkt. 11, is DENIED. The clerk of court is ORDERED to STRIKE the supplemental complaint, Dkt. 12.

It is further ORDERED that the clerk of court send Swetland a copy of the standard § 1983 form.

It is finally ORDERED that Swetland has 30 days from the receipt of this order to file an amended complaint on the standard § 1983 form. He must include all of his allegations against each defendant in the amended complaint. He should be careful to place the cause number, 4:25cv785, on the form and all other documents that he submits as part of the present case. The amended complaint will replace the original complaint and become the active pleading in this action.

Swetland is admonished that failure to comply with or otherwise respond to this order may result in dismissal of the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for want of prosecution.