Carolyn Cox et al. v. Crum & Forster et al.

Summary

The court grants the plaintiffs’ motions to amend their complaint to add Great American Insurance Company and correct diversity-citizenship allegations, but denies expedited consideration. The court also grants defendants’ motion to seal an unredacted amended Diversity Jurisdiction Disclosure Statement and directs that related ownership information in the proposed amended complaint be sealed. The order explains the standards governing amendment of pleadings and sealing judicial records.

Holdings

1. Leave to amend should be granted because the operative proposed amended complaint corrected the previously identified citizenship deficiencies, was filed before a deadline to amend pleadings or trial date had accrued, was ordered by the court, and was unopposed.
2. The motion for expedited consideration should be denied because the asserted basis for expedition was the imminent dismissal of C&F, while the amendment process had already been delayed by deficient jurisdictional allegations and the trial and pretrial deadlines had been continued without date.
3. The defendants' amended diversity jurisdiction disclosure statement and the unredacted proposed amended complaint should be filed under seal because defendants specifically demonstrated legitimate privacy and competitive interests and a real threat of harm from disclosure that outweighed the public's interest in access in this particular case.

Questions Presented

1. Whether plaintiffs should be granted leave under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) to file their latest supplemental and amended complaint.
2. Whether plaintiffs' motion for expedited consideration should be granted.
3. Whether defendants should be permitted to file their amended diversity jurisdiction disclosure statement under seal and whether the related unredacted proposed complaint should also be sealed.

Disposition

other