Lee v. Security Check, LLC et al
Filing
29
ORDER denying 26 Motion oral argument; granting in part and denying in part 3 motion to amend/correct; finding as moot 14 Motion to dismiss; granting in part and denying in part 15 motion to amend/correct. See order for details. Amended complaint due not later than 7/30/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Morris on 7/10/2009. (DLC)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION JOHN P. LEE, Plaintiff, vs. CASE NO. 3:09-cv-421-J-12TEM
SECURITY CHECK, LLC, PIZZA HUT OF FLORIDA, INC., and EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., Defendants. __________________________________ ORDER This case is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Complaint (Doc. #3), which was pending when the case was removed to federal court on May 8, 2009, and Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Complaint to Correct Misnomer (Doc. #15), filed May 15, 2009. Plaintiff separately filed supporting memoranda of law on the two motions (see Docs. #23, #24). Defendant Security Check, LLC filed its Opposition to Plaintiff's First Motion to Amend Complaint (Doc. #25) on May 26, 2009. To date, no other responses to the instant motions have been filed. Plaintiff filed the Request for Oral Arguments in Reply to Defendant's Opposition to Plaintiff's First Motion to Amend Complaint (Doc. #26, Request) on May 27, 2009. Upon review of the record, the Court found the issues raised by Plaintiff were fully briefed and concluded oral argument would not benefit the Court in its making its determinations. Accordingly, the matter has been decided on the written record and Plaintiff's Request (Doc. #26) is DENIED. Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure states that leave to amend "shall
be freely given when justice so requires." Fed. R. Civ. p. 15; Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). In the language of the Foman Court, In the absence of any apparent or declared reasonsuch as undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of the movant, repeated failure to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed, undue prejudice to the opposing party by virtue of allowance of the amendment, futility of amendment, etc. the leave sought should, as the rules require, be
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?