Wills v. City of Monterey

Background

Cynthia S. Wills, proceeding without a lawyer, sued the City of Monterey, the Monterey Police Department, and Harbor Patrol concerning enforcement of the City’s anti-camping ordinances. The defendants moved to dismiss Wills’s first amended complaint. In her opposition, Wills asked for permission to amend her claims against the City defendants again. She stated that she had tried to obtain help from the court’s help desk but could not schedule an appointment until January 18, 2022. She argued that she could amend her complaint to satisfy the court’s requirements.

The opinion states that Wills had successfully amended her claims against Montage Health, but it does not describe those claims in detail. The court had previously identified deficiencies in an earlier order granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss.

Reasoning

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 generally requires courts to freely allow amendments when justice requires. Courts may deny leave for reasons such as undue delay, bad faith, repeated failure to correct deficiencies, unfair prejudice, or futility—meaning the proposed amendment could not fix the pleading.

The court found that these factors favored allowing another amendment. There was no indication that the amendment would cause significant delay or expense, unfairly prejudice the defendants, or raise new issues. The court also concluded that it was not clear that Wills’s complaint could not be saved by an amendment. The court considered both the policy favoring amendments and the more forgiving standards applied to complaints filed by people without lawyers.

Ruling

The court granted Wills’s request for leave to amend. It ordered her to file an amended complaint by March 18, 2022. The court denied the City defendants’ motion to dismiss as moot. The defendants could file a new motion to dismiss the later amended complaint. Judge Edward M. Chen stated that the order disposed of Docket Nos. 64 and 66.