In re Chicago Bridge & Iron Company N.V. Securities Litigation
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:17-cv-01580
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In re Chicago Bridge & Iron securities litigation: Judge Schofield ordered defendants to amend their answers to add bankruptcy-related defenses.
The defendants in the securities litigation, who were ordered to file amended answers raising the identified bankruptcy-related defenses.
What happened
In In re Chicago Bridge & Iron Company N.V. Securities Litigation, the defendants asked to amend their answers to add two defenses connected to a bankruptcy proceeding involving the successor to Chicago Bridge & Iron Company, N.V.
The court found that allowing the amendments would not be futile and would not cause undue delay, unfairness, or surprise because the defenses involved a bankruptcy plan being considered in a Texas bankruptcy proceeding known to all parties.
Judge Lorna G. Schofield ordered the defendants to file amended answers by March 10, 2021, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the motion.
The detailed version
- In re Chicago Bridge & Iron Company N.V. Securities Litigation · No. 1:17-cv-01580
- Lorna Schofield
- Feb. 25, 2021
Background
The parties submitted letters about the defendants’ request to amend their answers to raise two defenses arising from a bankruptcy proceeding involving the successor entity of Defendant Chicago Bridge & Iron Company, N.V. The court had previously stated that it would address the request in its opinion on the defendants’ summary judgment motion.
Legal standard
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) provides that permission to amend pleadings should be freely given when justice requires. The court noted that this standard reflects a preference for resolving disputes on their merits.
Reasons for the ruling
The court determined that allowing the amendment would not be futile and would not result in undue delay, prejudice, or surprise. The defenses arose from a bankruptcy plan issued and interpreted in the Texas bankruptcy proceeding, and the court stated that all parties were undisputedly aware of that proceeding.
Ruling
The court ordered the defendants to file amended answers raising the defenses identified in their September 24, 2021, letter by March 10, 2021. It also directed the Clerk of Court to close the motion at Docket No. 260. The order addressed permission to amend the answers; it did not decide the underlying securities-litigation claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.