Barnes v. The St. Regis Corp.

Filing 28

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The Court will, therefore, deny Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint based onthe futility of the Courts granting the Motion. 24 MOTION for Leave to File an Amended Complaint filed by Plaintiff Dewayne C. Barnes Signed by District Judge Jean C. Hamilton on 11/15/17. (CLA)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION DEWAYNE C. BARNES, Plaintiff, vs. THE ST. REGIS CORP., Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 4:17CV1629JCH MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint, attached to which is a proposed amended complaint. (ECF 24; ECF 24-1). Plaintiff’s Complaint, filed on June 7, 2017, names only The St. Regis Corp. as a Defendant. (ECF 1). In the proposed amended complaint, Plaintiff adds Sentry Management, Inc., (Sentry) as a Defendant. (ECF 24-1). “In order to initiate a claim under Title VII a party must timely file a charge of discrimination with the [Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)] and receive a right-to-sue letter.” Stuart v. Gen. Motors Corp., 217 F.3d 621, 630 (8th Cir. 2000). Plaintiff has filed a copy of the right-to-sue letter issued by the EEOC regarding Sentry. (ECF 27). The right-to-sue letter regarding Sentry was issued on June 20, 2017. As stated in the right-to-sue letter, Plaintiff had 90 days after the letter was issued to file a civil action against Sentry. See 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e5(f)(1). Plaintiff, however, filed his Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint on November 9, 2017, well past the 90-day period. (ECF 27 at 1). The Court will, therefore, deny Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint based on the futility of the Court’s granting the Motion. See Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962) (“in the absence of any apparent or declared reason,” such as “futility of amendment,” leave to amend should be “freely given,” but it is within a court’s discretion to deny a motion to amend); Sherman v. Winco Fireworks, Inc., 532 F.3d 709, 705 (8th Cir. 2008) (district court properly denies a motion for leave to amend where there are compelling reasons to do due so, such as “futility of the amendment”) (citation omitted).. Dated this 15th Day of November 2017. /s/ Jean C. Hamilton UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?