Harvell v. Ervin et al
Filing
73
MEMORANDUM OPINION by Judge Charles R. Simpson, III on 11/5/12; re 72 Second MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Sherry Patterson, 65 Third MOTION to Amend/Correct 53 Amended Complaint filed by Anthony Harvell. A separate order will be entered this date in accordance with this opinion cc:counsel (SJS)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT LOUISVILLE
ANTHONY HARVELL
PLAINTIFF
v.
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:11CV-525-S
TERRIS L. ERVIN, et al.
DEFENDANTS
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the court on motion of the plaintiff, Anthony Harvell, for leave to file
a third amended complaint (DN 65) and the renewed motion of the third-party defendant, Sherry
Patterson, to dismiss the third-party complaint (DN 72).
This action arose from an automobile accident between a semi-tractor-trailer operated by
Terris L. Ervin and an automobile operated by Sherry Patterson. Harvell was a passenger in
Patterson’s vehicle at the time of the accident.
Harvell filed a personal injury suit against Ervin; Ervin’s employer, Blair Logistics, LLC;
and Sentry Casualty Company. Ervin and Blair Logistics filed a third-party complaint against
Patterson. Harvell settled his claims with Ervin, Blair Logistics, and Sentry.
Patterson has filed a renewed motion to dismiss the third-party complaint against her. (DN
72). There has been no objection to the motion, so it will be granted.
Harvell moved for leave to file a third amended complaint on July 26, 2012 to name
Patterson as a defendant and assert claims against her for negligence. Patterson objected on the
ground that the June 30, 2012 deadline for the amendment of pleadings had passed. Patterson urged
that Harvell did not show “good cause” for his tardiness in seeking leave to amend, citing Leary v.
Daeschner, 349 F.3d 888, 909 (6th Cir. 2003) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(b)(4). Harvell did not offer
grounds for late filing in his motion, nor did he reply to Patterson’s objection. The motion for leave
to file a third amended complaint will be denied, as good cause has not been shown for filing this
motion out of time.
A separate order will be entered herein this date in accordance with this opinion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
November 5, 2012
-2-
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?