Kassem v. Martin et al

Filing 54

ORDER: Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint 51 is GRANTED. The Clerk shall designate the First Amended Complaint [51-1] as filed as of the date of this Order. Each Defendant shall have fourteen (14) days to respond to the First Amended Complaint. Plaintiff's motions to strike 40 41 are DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge James S. Moody, Jr on 11/9/2016. (LN)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
OCALA DIVISION

LYNN KASSEM,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 5:15-cv-623-Oc-30PRL

MATT MARTIN, DEBI CONNOR, DC
SALES & ENTERTAINMENT, LLC and
DC SALES AND MARKETING, LTD,
Defendants.
________________________________/

ORDER
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Plaintiff Lynn Kassem's Motion for leave
to Amend Complaint. (Doc. 51). Plaintiff initiated this action against Defendants related to
the sale of horses that Plaintiff alleges were unfit for her child to ride. (Doc. 1). Defendants
answered Plaintiff’s complaint (Docs. 38 and 39), and Plaintiff moved to strike all of
Defendants affirmative defenses (Docs. 40 and 41). Before the Court ruled on Plaintiff’s
motion to strike, Plaintiff filed the present motion seeking leave to amend the complaint
based on new facts learned of during discovery. (Doc. 51). None of the Defendants
responded to the motion for leave to amend.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), a “court should freely give leave
[to amend] when justice so requires.” Leave to amend generally is granted unless there is
a significant reason for the amendment’s denial. Pioneer Metals, Inc. v. Univar USA, Inc.,

168 F. App’x 335, 337 (11th Cir. 2006). Permissible reasons justifying denial are “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 . .
., [and] futility of amendment.” Id. (quoting Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962)).
The Court finds none of those reasons applicable here and, accordingly, concludes Plaintiff
should be permitted to amend her complaint. In the event the Court’s ruling necessitates
new case management and scheduling deadlines, the parties are invited to petition the Court
to extend the deadlines, and the Court will remain mindful of the latitude granted Plaintiff
and the timing of the present ruling.
Accordingly, it is therefore ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint (Doc. 51) is GRANTED.
2. The Clerk shall designate the First Amended Complaint (Doc. 51–1) as filed as
of the date of this Order.
3. Each Defendant shall have fourteen (14) days to respond to the First Amended
Complaint.
4. Plaintiff’s motions to strike (Docs. 40 and 41) are DENIED as moot.
DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 9th day of November, 2016.

Copies furnished to:
Counsel/Parties of Record

2