Koubriti v. Convertino et al

Filing 24

MOTION to Amend/Correct 1 Complaint by Karim Koubriti. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A - Proposed First Amended Complaint) (Gonek, Ben)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
KARIM KOUBRITI,
Plaintiff,
v

Case No: 07-13678
Hon. MARIANNE O. BATTANI

RICHARD CONVERTINO,
MICHAEL THOMAS and
HARRY RAYMOND SMITH,
Jointly and Severally
and in their Individual Capacities,
Defendants.
_____________________________________________________________________________/
BEN M. GONEK (P43716)
THOMAS W. KRAMER (P25252)
BEN M. GONEK, P.C.
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN (P48999)
Attorney for Plaintiff
GERALD J. GLEESON, II (P53568)
615 Griswold Street
DAVID D. O’BRIEN (P65532)
1300 Ford Building
Miller, Canfield, Paddock & Stone, PLC
Detroit, Michigan 48226
Attorneys for Defendant Harry R. Smith
[phone]
840 W. Long Lake Road, Suite 200
Troy, Michigan 48098
ROBERT S. MULLEN (P54827)
[phone]
Attorney for Defendant Convertino
800 Starkweather Street
RICHARD L. SWICK
Plymouth, Michigan 48170
Attorney for Michael Thomas
[phone]
1225 Eye Street, NW, Suite 1290
Washington, D.C. 20005
[phone]
_____________________________________________________________________________/

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
NOW COMES Plaintiff, KARIM KOUBRITI, by and through his attorney, BEN M.
GONEK and states the following in support of his Motion for Leave to File a First Amended
Complaint:

1.

On August 30, 2007, Plaintiff filed his complaint in the above captioned matter

against Defendants alleging violations of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments and 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 based on Defendants’ malicious prosecution of Plaintiff.
2.

All the Defendants have filed Rule 12(b)(b) Motions seeking dismissal of the

complaint in lieu of filing an answer to the Complaint.
3.

Specifically, Plaintiff seeks to amend his complaint to properly plead the Fourteenth

Amendment claim Plaintiff has against the named Defendants. (See Exhibit A, Proposed First
Amended Complaint).
4.

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), a party may amend his

Complaint by leave of court and such leave “shall be freely given when justice so requires.”
5.

For the reasons specified in the attached supporting brief, Plaintiff’s request for an

amendment to his complaint is timely and should be granted where no party will be prejudiced
and the amendment is timely.
6.

Plaintiff sought concurrence with Defendants in this matter, and such was denied.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court grant his Motion
for Leave to File a First Amended Complaint.
Respectfully submitted by:
s/ Ben M. Gonek
BEN M. GONEK (P43716)
Attorneys for Plaintiff
1300 Ford Building
615 Griswold Street
Detroit, Michigan 48226
[phone]
[e-mail]

Dated: January 28, 2008

2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
KARIM KOUBRITI,
Plaintiff,
v

Case No: 07-13678
Hon. MARIANNE O. BATTANI

RICHARD CONVERTINO,
MICHAEL THOMAS and
HARRY RAYMOND SMITH,
Jointly and Severally
and in their Individual Capacities,
Defendants.
_____________________________________________________________________________/
BEN M. GONEK (P43716)
THOMAS W. KRAMER (P25252)
BEN M. GONEK, P.C.
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN (P48999)
Attorney for Plaintiff
GERALD J. GLEESON, II (P53568)
615 Griswold Street
DAVID D. O’BRIEN (P65532)
1300 Ford Building
Miller, Canfield, Paddock & Stone, PLC
Detroit, Michigan 48226
Attorneys for Defendant Harry R. Smith
[phone]
840 W. Long Lake Road, Suite 200
Troy, Michigan 48098
ROBERT S. MULLEN (P54827)
[phone]
Attorney for Defendant Convertino
800 Starkweather Street
RICHARD L. SWICK
Plymouth, Michigan 48170
Attorney for Michael Thomas
[phone]
1225 Eye Street, NW, Suite 1290
Washington, D.C. 20005
[phone]
_____________________________________________________________________________/

BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR LEAVE TO FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ii
Table of Authorities .......................................................................................................................iii
Question Presented .........................................................................................................................iv
Introduction ......................................................................................................................................1
Argument .........................................................................................................................................1
I.

Plaintiff Should Be Allowed to Amend His Complaint ..........................1

Relief Requested ...............................................................................................................................2

ii

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
United States Supreme Court
Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178; 83 S.Ct. 227; 9 L.Ed.2d. 222 (1962) ..............................................2
United States Circuit Courts
Tefft v. Seward, 689 F.2d 637 (6th Cir.1982) ..................................................................................1
Federal Statutes
42 U.S.C. § 1983 ...............................................................................................................................1
Amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America
U.S. Const. Amend. IV.......................................................................................................................1
U.S. Const. Amend. XIV ....................................................................................................................1
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a) ..............................................................................................................................1

iii

QUESTION PRESENTED
I.

Should Plaintiff Be Allowed to Amend His Complaint?
Plaintiff answers “Yes.”
Defendants answer “No.”

iv

INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff filed his original complaint on August 30, 2007, alleging violations of the Fourth
and Fourteenth Amendments and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based on Defendants’ malicious prosecution.
In lieu of filing an answer to the complaint, all of the Defendants have moved to dismiss
Plaintiff’s complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). Plaintiff is now seeking leave of the Court to
properly plead a Fourteenth Amendment violation against the named Defendants.

ARGUMENT
I.

Plaintiff Should Be Allowed to Amend His Complaint.

Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P 15(a), a party may amend its Complaint by leave of the court,
and such leave to amend shall be freely given when justice so requires. The Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure provide for a liberal policy of permitting amendments to ensure that claims are
adjudicated on their merits. Tefft v. Seward, 689 F.2d 637, 639 (6th Cir.1982). “If the underlying
facts or circumstances relied upon by a plaintiff may be a proper subject of relief, he ought to be
afforded an opportunity to test his claim on the merits.” Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182; 83
S.Ct. 227; 9 L.Ed.2d. 222 (1962).
Generally, a motion to amend a complaint should only be denied for a limited number of
particularized reasons, such as: (1) undue delay, (2) bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of
the moveant, (3) repeated failure to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed, (4)
undue prejudice to the opposing party by virtue of allowance of the amendment, or (5) futility of
the amendment. Foman, 371 U.S. at 182.

1

None of these factors are present in the instant case. Plaintiff has not acted with undue
delay, bad faith, or dilatory motive in bringing this motion for leave to amend, nor has he made
any previous attempts to amend the complaint. Moreover, Defendants will suffer no undue
prejudice if Plaintiff is allowed to amend his complaint only to name the additional officer
involved in the arrest of Plaintiff, and allowing Plaintiff to amend his complaint would certainly
not be futile where this information has come to light through discovery. (See Exhibit A,
Proposed First Amended Complaint).
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Honorable Court grant his Motion
for Leave to File a First Amended Complaint.
Respectfully submitted by:

s/ Ben M. Gonek
BEN M. GONEK (P43716)
Attorneys for Plaintiff
1300 Ford Building
615 Griswold Street
Detroit, Michigan 48226
[phone]
[e-mail]
Dated: January 28, 2008

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
BEN M. GONEK hereby states that on the 28th day of January 2008, he caused the
foregoing Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint to be filed electronically with
the United States District Court and that copies were forwarded to all counsel of record using
the ECF system.
s/ Ben M. Gonek
BEN M. GONEK (P43716)
2