Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana grants Cantium, LLC’s motion for leave to file an amended and restated complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2). The court finds that the relevant amendment factors favor leave and directs defendants to raise any concerns about the effect of the amendment on pending motions with the district court.
Holdings
- When amendment as a matter of course is no longer available, the court should freely grant leave to amend when justice so requires, absent a substantial reason such as undue delay, bad faith, repeated failure to cure deficiencies, undue prejudice, or futility. Because the relevant factors favored amendment, Cantium was granted leave to file its amended and restated complaint.
- The defendants' position that the amendment should not affect pending motions had to be presented to the district court through a separate submission and did not provide a basis for denying leave to amend.
Questions Presented
- Whether Cantium should be granted leave under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) to file an amended and restated complaint.
- Whether the defendants' concern that amendment might affect or delay pending motions required denying or limiting leave to amend.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (6)
- Chitimacha Tribe of Louisiana v. Harry L.L. Co., 690 F.2d 1157, 1163 (5th Cir. 1982)(followed)
- Mayeaux v. Louisiana Health Service & Indemnity Co., 376 F.3d 420, 425 (5th Cir. 2004)(followed)
- Smith v. EMC Corp., 393 F.3d 590, 595 (5th Cir. 2004)(followed)
- Yumilicious Franchise, LLC v. Barrie, 819 F.3d 170, 177 (5th Cir. 2016)(followed)
- Schiller v. Physicians Resources Group Inc., 342 F.3d 563, 566 (5th Cir. 2003)(followed)
- Martin's Herend Imports, Inc. v. Diamond & Gem Trading United States of America Co., 195 F.3d 765, 770 (5th Cir. 1999)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…