Snelling v. HSBC Card Services, Inc. et al

Filing 16

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for leave to amend [# 12 ] is denied. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Order Setting Rule 16 conference [# 10 ] entered on January 24, 2013 is vacated, and the scheduling conferen ce set for February 21, 2013 is canceled and will be reset, if necessary, following the Court's ruling on defendant's motion to dismiss. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff's opposition to dismissal shall be filed by March 7, 2013, and any reply brief may be filed by defendant by March 18, 2013. Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on February 11, 2013. (BRP)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
LONNIE SNELLING,
Plaintiff,
v.
HSBC CARD SERVICES, INC.,
et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:13CV50 CDP

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This case has been recently reassigned to me and is before me on plaintiff’s
motion to amend. Plaintiff seeks leave to amend his complaint based on defendant
HSBC’s corporate disclosure forms. Plaintiff wants to join HSBC Finance
Corporation and HSBC Holdings as defendants because defendant HSBC disclosed
that it was a subsidiary of these corporations. Contrary to plaintiff’s assertion, this
is not some sort of admission that these corporations are “interested parties.”
Ordinarily, a parent corporation is not liable for the acts of its subsidiary absent
certain circumstances that plaintiff has not alleged are present in this case. As
plaintiff has no basis for joining these additional defendants other than the parentsubsidiary relationship, plaintiff’s motion to amend will be denied.
It appears that this case was set for a scheduling conference before it was

transferred to me. As defendant HSBC has a pending motion to dismiss and
plaintiff has not yet obtained service on the remaining defendant, I will cancel the
scheduling conference and reset it, if necessary, following the Court’s ruling on the
pending motion to dismiss and the entry of the remaining defendant in this case.
Finally, I will grant plaintiff until March 7, 2013 to file his opposition to dismissal.
Any reply brief may be filed by March 18, 2013.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend
[#12] is denied.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Order Setting Rule 16 conference
[#10] entered on January 24, 2013 is vacated, and the scheduling conference set for
February 21, 2013 is canceled and will be reset, if necessary, following the Court’s
ruling on defendant’s motion to dismiss.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s opposition to dismissal shall
be filed by March 7, 2013, and any reply brief may be filed by defendant by
March 18, 2013.
_______________________________
CATHERINE D. PERRY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 11th day of February, 2013.
-2-