United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division
ROBERT E. PAYNE, Senior District Judge.
Keyon Sante Hardy, a former Virginia inmate filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. At the time he initiated this action, Hardy was proceeding pro se. Dr. Teklu moved to dismiss the action. Thereafter, Hardy retained counsel who filed a Motion to Amend and a Proposed Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 36, 37-1.) For the reasons that follow, the Motion to Amend (ECF No. 36) will be granted and the Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 18) will be denied.
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
On September 19, 2014, the Court filed Hardy's Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 14.) By Memorandum Order entered that same day, the Court dismissed Hardy's claims against all defendants except Dr. Teklu. On October 2, 2014, Dr. Teklu filed his Motion to Dismiss.
A. Hardy's Pro Se Submissions
On December 30, 2014, Hardy moved to supplement the record to include his - medical record and moved for an evidentiary hearing.
B. Hardy's Represented Submission
On March 25, 2015, counsel appeared on Hardy's behalf, moved to amend the complaint, and submitted a proposed amended complaint.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 (a) provides, in pertinent part:
(a) Amendments Before Trial.
(1) Amending as a Matter of Course. A party may amend its pleading once as a matter of course within:
(A) 21 days after serving it, or
(B) if the pleading is one to which a responsive pleading is required, 21 days after service of a responsive pleading or 21 days after service of a motion under Rule ...