Rushing v. McGaw Medical Center of Northwestern University

Background

Judgment was entered in the case on March 5, 2026. On March 30, 2026, Marcus Rushing filed an amended complaint, an application to proceed without paying filing fees, and a motion asking the court to arrange service of process on the defendants.

Amended complaint

The court explained that a party may amend a pleading once automatically at the beginning of a case, but that right ends when judgment has been entered. After judgment, the party must obtain the court’s permission to amend. District of Minnesota Local Rule 15.1(b) also requires the proposed amended pleading to be accompanied by a document showing, through methods such as redlining, underlining, or strikeouts, how it differs from the operative pleading.

Rushing did not request permission to amend and did not provide the required comparison document. The court therefore held that the amended complaint had no legal effect. The court stated that the case remained dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Rulings

Because the amended complaint would not become operative, the court denied Rushing’s motion for service of the summons. The court also denied his application to proceed without paying filing fees. To the extent the application concerned proceedings in the district court, the court denied it as moot. To the extent it concerned an appeal, the court denied it because the court determined that the jurisdictional basis for dismissal could not reasonably be disputed and that an appeal could not be taken without fees if the trial court certifies that it is not taken in good faith. The court further stated that the time to file a notice of appeal had expired and that it would not extend or reopen that period.

Judge John R. Tunheim’s order specifically states: (1) Rushing’s application to proceed without paying filing fees was DENIED; and (2) Rushing’s motion for service of the summons was DENIED.