the motion to one for summary judgment even when the documents are not physically attached to the complaint. See Great Plains Trust Co. v. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co., 313 F.3d 305, 313 (5th Cir.2002) (stating the district court properly considered documents not attached to the complaint in ruling on Rule 12(c) motion). The Court also may consider documents attached to a motion to dismiss without converting the motion into one for summary judgment if the documents are referred to in the complaint and are central to the plaintiffs claim. Causey v. Sewell Cadillac-Chevrolet, Inc., 394 F.3d 285, 288 (5th Cir.2004) (citation omitted). Here, plaintiff moves for leave to file a suppl l Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., No. 06-4093, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 96000, at *5 (E.D.La. Nov. 2, 2006) (<HOLDING>). B) Motion to Dismiss (i) National Flood
holding that a court ruling on a motion to dismiss may consider a document that is referenced in the complaint and is central to the plaintiffs claims holding that the note and the mortgage must coexist to give the mortgage validity holding that the court may consider an article not attached to the complaint in determining whether to dismiss the complaint because the article was integral to and explicitly relied on in the complaint and because the plaintiffs did not challenge its authenticity holding that foreclosure of prior mortgage extinguished second mortgage holding court could consider a mortgage agreement not attached to the complaint in ruling on motion to dismiss because the complaint refers to the mortgage numerous times the mortgage is attached to this motion and is central to plaintiffs claims