Padre (alias) and Junior (alias), on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. MVM, Inc.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Southern District of California grants Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a First Amended Class Action Complaint. The court applies Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 and concludes that, despite undue delay, the factors of bad faith, prejudice, and futility do not overcome the presumption favoring amendment.

Holdings

1. Although Plaintiffs failed to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7(b)(1)(B) and Civil Local Rule 7.1(f)(1), the court declined to deny the motion solely on those procedural grounds.
2. The prior dismissal of the Section 1985, Section 1986, and intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress claims as to Padre and Junior did not bar newly proposed plaintiffs from asserting those claims.
3. Leave to amend should be granted because Defendant failed to make a sufficient showing of bad faith, undue prejudice, or futility, despite some undue delay.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the court should deny Plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend because the motion failed to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7(b)(1)(B) and Civil Local Rule 7.1(f)(1).
2. Whether adding different plaintiffs to claims previously dismissed as to Padre and Junior would improperly resurrect dismissed claims.
3. Whether undue delay, bad faith, prejudice, or futility required denial of leave to amend under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a).

Disposition

other