B.M. v. Wyndham Hotels & Resorts, Inc.

Background

B.M. brought the action under the federal Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, alleging that hotels knowingly benefited from sex-trafficking ventures operated in and out of their rooms. The case was later stayed while the alleged traffickers faced criminal prosecution. During the stay, B.M. died, and her mother, J.M., was substituted as the plaintiff.

The stay was lifted on October 13, 2023. The scheduling order allowed amendment within 60 days after the stay ended. J.M. filed an earlier motion to amend within that period, but the court terminated it without prejudice after J.M. indicated that she had reached additional defendants and claims. J.M. then filed the present motion on July 2, 2024, with a proposed second amended complaint adding defendants and claims for negligence and wrongful death.

Court’s analysis

The court found the present motion timely and consistent with the scheduling order. It therefore applied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15, which generally directs courts to freely allow amendments when justice requires, rather than Rule 16’s stricter good-cause standard for amendments sought after a deadline.

The court considered the factors commonly used to decide whether amendment should be allowed: undue delay, bad faith or a delaying motive, repeated failure to fix deficiencies, unfair prejudice to the opposing party, and futility of the amendment. The court found that none of those factors was present. Wyndham, the only defendant remaining in the case at that time, filed a statement saying it did not oppose the proposed amendment.

Disposition

The court GRANTED J.M.’s unopposed motion for leave to amend. J.M. SHALL file the second amended complaint by July 24, 2024. The court also VACATED the previously scheduled November 25, 2024 hearing and terminated ECF 161. This order addressed amendment of the pleadings and did not resolve the underlying liability claims.