Francois v. Jefferson Parish et al

Filing 12

ORDER AND REASONS granting 5 Motion for leave to Supplement Complaint to Add Attachments; granting 7 Motion for leave to Supplement Complaint to Add Attachments. Signed by Judge Helen G. Berrigan on 03/26/2014. (kac)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
MATTHIAS FRANCOIS

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

NO. 14-338

JEFFERSON PARISH, ET. AL

SECTION: “C” (5)
ORDER AND REASONS

Before this Court are two Motions for Leave to Supplement Complaint to Add Attachments
under Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure brought by the pro se plaintiff, Matthias
Francois. Rec. Docs. 5 and 7. Having considered the record and the law, the Court has determined
that the Motions for Leave to Supplement Complaint to Add Attachments are GRANTED for the
following reasons.
FACTUAL SUMMARY
The plaintiff was arrested on October 24, 2012 and charged with violations of
La. R.S. 14:59A(5) (Criminal Mischief - Filing a False Police Report) and La. R.S. 14:285A
(Harassing Phone Calls). Case No. 13-2640, Rec. Docs. 25 and 25-1. The charges are open and
pending against the plaintiff. Id. After his arrest, the plaintiff was found incompetent to proceed to
trial in a sanity hearing. Id. On February 13, 2014, the plaintiff filed the complaint at issue. Rec.
Doc. 3. The complaint alleges that the plaintiff's psychologist, Rafael Salcedo, and psychiatrist,
Richard Richoux, committed medical malpractice when they determined that the plaintiff was

mentally incompetent to proceed to trial. Id. On February 13, 2014, the plaintiff filed his first Motion
to Supplement. Rec. Doc. 5. In this motion, the plaintiff asserts that he is competent to stand trial
and attaches a psychiatrist report in support of his claim. Id. On March 5, 2014, the plaintiff filed
his second Motion to Supplement. Rec. Doc. 7. In the second motion, the plaintiff lists the names
of the two defendants's insurance companies and states that he is "suing the insurer directly each
Insurance company i [sic] demand a sum of 500,000 Dollars from each insurance company listed
on this document." Id. at 1.
ANALYSIS
Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure dictates that leave to amend pleadings "shall
be freely given when justice so requires." Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a). However, the "grant or denial of an
opportunity to amend [a complaint] is within the discretion of the district court.” Foman v. Davis,
371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). When considering a motion to amend a complaint, the Court should
examine whether a proposed amendment would be futile, made in bad faith, result in undue delay,
or cause prejudice to the opposing party. Gregory v. Mitchell, 634 F.2d. 199, 203 (5th Cir. 1981).
At this early stage in the proceedings, and with no opposition to the motions having been filed, the
Court finds that leave to supplement the complaint to add attachments can be granted without
prejudice to the defendants.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiff’s Motions for Leave to Supplement Complaint to Add
Attachments are GRANTED . Rec. Docs. 5 and 7.

2

New Orleans, Louisiana, this 26 day of March , 2014.

____________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3