Pachulia et al v. R Usow Accounting LLC et al

Filing 41

ORDER signed by Judge J.P. Stadtmueller on 7/26/2017: DENYING 33 Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint and GRANTING 34 Plaintiffs' Motion to Seal Documents. (cc: all counsel) (jm)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN ZAZA PACHULIA and TINATIN ALAVIDZE, Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 16-CV-1531-JPS-JPS RANDY USOW ACCOUNTING, INC. and RANDY USOW, Defendants, and ORDER CAROLINA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Intervenor Defendant. On July 17, 2017, Plaintiffs filed an expedited motion for leave to amend their complaint. (Docket #33).1 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 dictates that leave to amend a pleading should be freely given “when justice so requires.” See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Reasons for denying leave to amend can include undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of the movant, undue prejudice to the opposing party, and futility. Airborne Beepers & Video, Inc. v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 499 F.3d 663, 666 (7th Cir. 2007). Plaintiffs propose to re-name R. Usow Accounting, LLC as a defendant, and add allegations of tax preparation improprieties in 2012. (Docket #33). The parties dispute who is responsible for the delay in correcting these Plaintiffs filed a motion to seal certain exhibits attached to their motion for leave to amend. (Docket #34). The exhibits are confidential portions of Defendants’ document production. Id. The Court will grant the motion to seal. 1 omissions in the pleadings. Id.; (Docket #40). While each side may be at fault for the present state of affairs, justice does not require amendment for a different reason. The dispositive motion deadline in this matter passed on July 20, 2017, and the trial is set for November 27, 2017. (Docket #15). Permitting amendment at this stage would require adjournment of those dates, something that the Court informed the parties was not a possibility at the scheduling conference of January 26, 2017. See (Docket #14). Because Plaintiffs’ proposed amendment would prejudice the Court’s schedule and delay justice, their motion for leave to amend must be denied. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file their second amended complaint (Docket #33) be and the same is hereby DENIED; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ motion to seal (Docket #34) be and the same is hereby GRANTED. Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this 26th day of July, 2017. BY THE COURT: ____________________________________ J. P. Stadtmueller U.S. District Judge Page 2 of 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?