Hoops v. Medical Reimbursements of America, Inc. et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER... IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a second amended complaint is GRANTED. ECF No. 47 . The Clerk of Court shall detach ECF No. 47-1 and file it as Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint. Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 4/3/2017. (NEB)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
MEDICAL REIMBURSEMENTS OF
AMERICA, INC., et al.,
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a second
amended complaint. Plaintiff’s proposed amendment adds a breach-of-contract claim
based on breach of a “Consent and Agreement Physician Services and Hospital Services,”
which Plaintiff entered with Defendant Mercy Hospitals East Communities; removes a
conversion claim, and adds facts relating to damages. The motion was filed before the
deadline to amend pleadings as set forth in the Case Management Order. Defendants
oppose the motion, arguing that the amendment could have been made sooner and that the
proposed new breach-of-contract claim is futile.
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a), a court “should freely give leave [to
amend pleadings] when justice so requires.” Notwithstanding this liberal standard, a
court may deny leave to amend where the proposed amendment would be futile or cause
unfair prejudice to the opposing party. Crest Const. II, Inc. v. Doe, 660 F.3d 346, 358 (8th
Cir. 2011). Defendants have not shown they would be unfairly prejudiced by allowing
Plaintiff to amend her complaint. And at this stage, the Court cannot say that the proposed
new breach-of-contract claim would be futile.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a second
amended complaint is GRANTED. ECF No. 47. The Clerk of Court shall detach ECF
No. 47-1 and file it as Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint.
AUDREY G. FLEISSIG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 3rd day of April, 2017.
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?