Scott et al v. BJC Health

Filing 59

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 54 PRO SE MOTION filed by Plaintiff Jarvis Simms, Plaintiff Walter F. Scott is denied. Signed by Honorable Jean C. Hamilton on 6/30/11. (CLA)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION

WALTER SCOTT, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
BJC BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:11CV00633 JCH

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend to Join Defendants
[sic] Ann McLaughlin (Doc. No. 54). Upon this Court’s review of this Motion and the proposed
Amended Complaint, the Court finds the proposed amendment is deficient and, therefore, denies
Plaintiff’s Motion.
STANDARD
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) governs a party’s right to amend its pleadings and the
rule declares that leave to amend “shall be freely given when justice so requires.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a).
Given the courts’ liberal viewpoint towards leave to amend, such motions normally are granted absent
good reason for a denial. See Thompson-El v. Jones, 876 F.2d 66, 67 (8th Cir. 1989). The classic
“good reasons” for rejecting an amendment are: “undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive, repeated
failure to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed, undue prejudice to the non-moving
party, or futility of amendment ….” Id. (citing Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182, 9 L. Ed. 2d 222,
83 S. Ct. 227 (1962)).

DISCUSSION
The Original Complaint was filed on April 11, 2011. (Doc. No. 1). Therein, Plaintiffs alleged
that Ellen Depker, a case manager for BJC Behavioral Health, lied to police officers by claiming,
among other things, that Plaintiff Scott made verbal threats about shooting anyone that came to the
house. (Fourth Amended Complaint (“FAC”; Doc. No. 54-1), ¶¶6, 43(a); Complaint, ¶19(d)).
In the proposed Fourth Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs make allegations related to events that
occurred after the inception of this litigation. See, e.g., FAC, ¶¶ 42-45. Plaintiffs allege that
Probation Officers Daniel Spring and Ann McLaughlin have been harassing Plaintiffs and “caused
Simms to be falsely arrested ... on false charges...” on June 17, 2011. FAC, ¶46(b).1 These
allegations relate to events that are separate and distinct from the allegations in the original
Complaint, which occurred on or around March 29, 2011. (FAC, ¶7). Because there are no common
questions of law or fact with original Complaint, the Court denies Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave. If
Plaintiffs wish to bring these claims, they must file a new lawsuit.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Motion for Leave to Amend to Join Defendants [sic] Ann
McLaughlin (Doc. No. 54) is DENIED.
Dated this 30th day of June, 2011.

/s/ Jean C. Hamilton
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1

Plaintiffs seek leave to add Ann McLaughlin, in her individual and official capacities, as a
defendant in this action. McLaughlin is a “Unit Supervisor” with the Missouri Board of Probation
and Parole. (FAC, ¶6(g)).
-2-