Rose v. Lincoln Benefit Life Company
- Susan Nelson
- 0:20-cv-02260
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 4
In Rose v. Lincoln Benefit Life Company, Judge Leung granted the parties’ motion allowing a supplemental complaint and changing the discovery schedule.
Kathryn Rose, John Harris, and Jenifer Harris may file a supplemental complaint; Lincoln Benefit Life Company must respond within 21 days after it is filed, and the case schedule will be amended.
What happened
In Rose v. Lincoln Benefit Life Company, Kathryn Rose, John Harris, and Jenifer Harris sought permission to add claims based on events occurring after their original complaint. Lincoln Benefit Life Company disputed the merits of those proposed claims but did not oppose filing the supplemental complaint.
The court considered the parties’ agreement, the late request under the scheduling order, and whether the plaintiffs showed good cause for changing the deadlines. It found good cause, no evidence of prejudice to Lincoln Benefit, and that most deadlines would remain unchanged.
Judge Tony N. Leung granted the stipulated motion. The plaintiffs must file the supplemental complaint within seven days, Lincoln Benefit must respond within 21 days after filing, and a second amended scheduling order will issue.
The detailed version
- Rose v. Lincoln Benefit Life Company · No. 0:20-cv-02260
- Susan Nelson
- Aug. 5, 2021
Background
Kathryn Rose, John Harris, and Jenifer Harris sued Lincoln Benefit Life Company. The parties jointly asked for permission to file a supplemental complaint and to amend the case’s scheduling order. The plaintiffs said they had identified transactions, occurrences, and events that happened after the original pleading and that they believed supported additional claims. Lincoln Benefit disputed the merits of those proposed claims but did not oppose filing the supplemental complaint.
The parties also agreed on the time for Lincoln Benefit to respond to the proposed supplemental complaint and on a 90-day extension of the fact-discovery deadline. The deadline for seeking leave to amend the pleadings had already passed.
Legal standard
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(d) allows a court, on fair terms, to permit a supplemental pleading addressing events that occurred after the pleading being supplemented. Ordinarily, such requests are treated liberally. But because the request came after the deadline in the pretrial scheduling order, the plaintiffs also had to show “good cause” under Rule 16(b). The main measure of good cause is the moving party’s diligence, with possible prejudice to the opposing party also considered.
Ruling
The Court found that the plaintiffs had shown good cause to supplement their complaint. It also found no evidence of prejudice to Lincoln Benefit and noted that most deadlines would remain unchanged. The Court therefore GRANTED the parties’ Stipulated Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Complaint and Amend Scheduling Order.
The order requires the plaintiffs to file a supplemental complaint substantially in the same form as the proposed complaint within seven days of the order. Lincoln Benefit must respond within 21 days after the supplemental complaint is filed. A Second Amended Pretrial Scheduling Order will issue, and the prior consistent orders remain in effect. The order also states that failure to comply may lead to remedies or sanctions, including costs, fines, attorney fees, evidentiary limits, striking pleadings, dismissal with prejudice, or default judgment.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.