Hornbeck v. Archdiocese of St. Louis et al

Filing 67

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to amend 47 is granted, and the second amended complaint is deemed filed as of this date.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motions to dismiss directed at theamended complaint [31, 33] are denied as moot. (see full order for details.) Signed by District Judge Catherine D. Perry on 08/01/2022. (KRZ)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
CHRISTIAN HORNBECK,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
ARCHDIOCESE OF ST. LOUIS, et al., )
)
Defendants.
)

Case No. 4:22 CV 345 CDP

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before me on plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a second
amended complaint. This case was originally filed in state court and removed here
on March 24, 2022. Defendant Sisters of St. Joseph of Carondelet, St. Louis
Province, opposes amendment on the ground that plaintiff has already been granted
leave to amend his complaint. No other defendants oppose amendment, and their
time for filing an opposition has expired.
Rule 15 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that “the court
should freely give leave when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Under
this liberal standard, “[a] district court may deny leave to amend if there are
compelling reasons such as 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 the amendment.” Reuter v. Jax Ltd., Inc., 711
F.3d 918, 922 (8th Cir. 2013) (cleaned up).

While the Court is not unsympathetic to the arguments of defendant, under
the liberal standards applicable to amendment, and given the procedural posture of
this case, the Court will grant plaintiff leave to amend once more. However,
plaintiff will not be permitted to counter future motions to dismiss by seeking leave
to amend his complaint.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motion to amend [47] is granted, and
the second amended complaint is deemed filed as of this date.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motions to dismiss directed at the
amended complaint [31, 33] are denied as moot.

CATHERINE D. PERRY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 1st day of August, 2022.

2