Jurgens v. Build.com, Inc.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER : IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs motion for leave to file a second amended complaint is GRANTED. ECF No. 16 . The Clerk of Court shall detach ECF No. 16-1 and file it as Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint. Signed by District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig on 07/10/2017. (KCB)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This putative class action, removed to the Court on February 22, 2017, arises out of
Defendant’s alleged disclosure of its online customers’ credit card details to third parties
without the customers’ knowledge or consent. The matter is now before the Court on
Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. Plaintiff’s proposed
amendment adds two claims under the federal “Wiretap Act,” 18 U.S.C. § 2511, and
removes claims for violation of Missouri’s computer tampering statutes, violation of the
Missouri Merchandising Practices Act, and invasion of privacy. The motion was filed
before the deadline to amend pleadings as set forth in the Case Management Order, and
discovery does not close until May 31, 2018.
Defendant opposes the motion, arguing that the amendment would prejudice it by
changing the nature of the lawsuit and requiring additional discovery. Defendant also
suggests that the proposed amendment would be futile, but Defendant states that the futility
issue may be more fully addressed in a motion to dismiss, should the Court grant Plaintiff
leave to amend.
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). Given the very early stage of this case and the overlap of facts underlying the
claims in both the original and proposed amended complaints, the Court does not believe
that Defendant would be unfairly prejudiced by the proposed amendment. And as
Defendant suggests, the merits of Plaintiff’s amended claims may be addressed at a later
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a second
amended complaint is GRANTED. ECF No. 16. The Clerk of Court shall detach ECF
No. 16-1 and file it as Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint.
AUDREY G. FLEISSIG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 10th day of July, 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?