SE Property Holdings, LLC v. Stewart
Order re: 20 Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint filed by SE Property Holdings, LLC. Responses due by 4/28/2014. If no objection is filed by that time, it is ORDERED that the motion (Doc. 20 ) be granted without further action by the Court, and Plaintiff shall file the proposed amended complaint (Doc. 20-1) attached to the motion as its operative complaint in this action by 4/30/2014. Signed by Judge Kristi K. DuBose on 4/18/2014. copies to parties. (sdb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SE PROPERTY HOLDINGS, LLC,
DAVID A. STEWART,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 13-00609-KD-C
This action is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend (Doc. 20).
“[P]ursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 15(a)(2)[,]” Plaintiff “requests leave to amend its pleadings to
new [sic] claims against Defendant David A. Stewart” and to add and assert claims against other
(Id. at 1).
The motion was filed April 11, 2014, and is timely under the Court’s Scheduling Order
(Doc. 15 at 1, ¶ 4).
As the Defendant filed his Answer on January 7, 2014, the time for Plaintiff
to amend its Complaint once as a matter of course has expired.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B).
Once the time period for amending a pleading as of right has expired, Rule 15(a)
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, provides amendment “only by leave of
court or by written consent of the adverse party.” The decision whether to grant
leave to amend a complaint is within the sole discretion of the district court. Rule
15(a), however, limits the court's discretion by mandating that “leave shall be
freely given when justice so requires.” See Halliburton & Assoc. v. Henderson,
Few & Co., 774 F.2d 441 (11th Cir. 1985). There must be a substantial reason to
deny a motion to amend. Id. Substantial reasons justifying a denial include “undue
delay, bad faith, dilatory motive on the part of the movant, ... undue prejudice to
the opposing party by virtue of allowance of the amendment, [and] futility of
amendment.” Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182, 83 S. Ct. 227, 9 L. Ed. 2d 222
Laurie v. Ala. Court of Criminal Appeals, 256 F.3d 1266, 1274 (11th Cir. 2001) (per curiam).
Upon consideration, the Court finds that, unless an opposing party can articulate a
“substantial reason” otherwise, Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend (Doc. 20) is due to be
granted. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that any objection to Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to
Amend (Doc. 20) shall be filed on or before Monday, April 28, 2014.
If no such objection is
filed by that time, it is ORDERED that the motion (Doc. 20) is GRANTED without further
action by the Court, and Plaintiff shall file the proposed amended complaint (Doc. 20-1) attached
to the motion as its operative complaint in this action on or before Wednesday, April 30, 2014.
Responsive pleadings to the amended complaint shall be filed within the time allowed by the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
DONE and ORDERED this the 18th day of April 2014.
/s/ Kristi K. DuBose
KRISTI K. DuBOSE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?