CASEY FAITH WILLIAMS
v.
SHERIFF BRAD WHITEHEAD, ET AL.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
This is a brief order from the District Court of the Middle District of Florida denying plaintiff Casey Faith Williams's motions for emergency relief as moot. The motions became moot when plaintiff filed an amended complaint, which superseded all previous pleadings and pending motions in the case.
The court held that the pending motions for temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction, and expedited ruling were moot because the filing of an amended complaint supersedes previously filed complaints and renders pending motions addressing the original complaint moot.
“An amended complaint supersedes a previously filed complaint”
Establishes the legal principle that filing an amended complaint renders the original complaint no longer operative
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Casey Faith Williams filed an Amended Complaint for Violation of Civil Rights on October 14, 2025. Prior to filing the amended complaint, pl…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Violation Of Civil Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE is before the Court sua sponte. On October 14, 2025, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint for Violation of Civil Rights (Dkt. No. 11) which rendered moot her previous pleadings and motions. See Malowney v. Federal Collection Deposit Group, 193 F. 3d 1342, 1345 n.1 (11th Cir. 1999) (noting that “[a]n amended complaint supersedes a previously filed complaint”); Meterlogic, Inc. v. Copier Solutions, Inc., 185 F. Supp. 2d 1292, 1297 (S.D. Fla. 2002) (noting that the plaintiff’s filing of an amended complaint “rendered moot the parties’ previous pleadings and the defendants’ summary judgment and Daubert motions”). In light of the foregoing, it is ORDERED: Plaintiffs Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 3), Plaintiffs Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary Injunction, and Motion to Rule Expediently and Expedite Screening (Doc. 7), and Plaintiffs Motion to Expedite Ruling on Emergency Temporary Restraining Order and Request for Ex Parte Consideration (Doc. 10) are DENIED as moot. DONE AND ORDERED in Jacksonville, Florida, this 20th day of October, 2025.
MARCIA MORALES HOWARD
United States District Judge
Ie11 Copies to:
Counsel of Record Pro Se Parties
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Malowney v. Fed. Collection Deposit Grp., 193 F.3d 1342 (11th Cir. 1999)
- Meterlogic, Inc. v. Copier Solutions, Inc., 185 F. Supp. 2d 1292 (S.D. Fla. 2002)