Federal National Mortgage Association v. Canyon Willow Owners Association, et al.

Filing 34

ORDER that 30 Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint is GRANTED. FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall have seven (7) days from the date of this order to file the amended complaint. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 1/30/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MMM)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 *** 7 8 FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION, ORDER Plaintiff(s), 9 v. 10 11 Case No. 2:16-CV-203 JCM (CWH) CANYON WILLOW OWNERS ASSOCIATION, et al., 12 Defendant(s). 13 14 15 16 17 Presently before the court is plaintiff Federal National Mortgage Association’s motion for leave to file its first amended complaint. (ECF No. 30). Plaintiff hopes “to add causes of action for constitutional and statutory violations stemming from the HOA foreclosure sale that gave rise to the original Complaint” in light of the Ninth Circuit’s recent decision in Bourne Valley Court Trust v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA, 832 F.3d 1154 (9th Cir. 2016).1 (ECF No. 30). 18 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) states: “[A] party may amend its pleading only 19 with the opposing party’s written consent or the court’s leave. The court should freely give leave 20 when justice so requires.” Moreover, “[a] district court determines the propriety of a motion to 21 amend by ascertaining the presence of any of four factors: bad faith, undue delay, prejudice to the 22 opposing party, and/or futility. Generally, this determination should be performed with all 23 inferences in favor of granting the motion.” Griggs v. Pace Am. Grp., Inc., 170 F.3d 877, 880 (9th 24 25 Cir. 1999) (citation omitted). Indeed, “where there is a lack of prejudice to the opposing party and the amended complaint is obviously not frivolous, or made as a dilatory maneuver in bad faith, it 26 27 28 James C. Mahan U.S. District Judge 1 The Ninth Circuit decided that case after plaintiff filed its original complaint. See Bourne Valley Court Trust, 832 F.3d at 1154; see also (ECF No. 1). 1 is an abuse of discretion to deny [a motion to amend.]” Howey v. United States, 481 F.2d 1187, 2 1190–91 (9th Cir. 1973). 3 Upon review of the instant motion and the corresponding proposed amended complaint, 4 this motion will be granted. (ECF Nos. 30, 30-1). Because plaintiff asserts these new allegations 5 6 7 in light of a recently published, highly relevant decision by the Ninth Circuit, this court finds that there is neither bad faith nor undue delay for the complaint’s amendment. See Griggs, 170 F.3d at 880. Moreover, the new claims in the amended complaint arise from essentially the same set of facts as those of the original complaint—thereby producing minimal prejudice to the defendant— 8 and the amendment does not appear to be futile. 9 Microsystems, Inc., 368 F.3d 1053, 1061 (9th Cir. 2004); Griggs, 170 F.3d at 880. See Thinket Ink Info. Res., Inc. v. Sun 10 Accordingly, 11 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that plaintiff’s motion for 12 13 14 15 16 leave to file an amended complaint (ECF No. 30) be, and the same hereby is, GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall have seven (7) days from the date of this order to file the amended complaint. DATED January 30, 2017. __________________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 James C. Mahan U.S. 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?