Ashton v. Al Qaeda Islamic
- George Daniels
- 1:02-cv-06977
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Ashton v. al Qaeda Islamic Army, Magistrate Judge Netburn granted the plaintiffs’ motion to amend their complaint and add identified parties to the action against the Taliban.
The Ashton plaintiffs, the parties identified in their amendment exhibits, and the Taliban. The order also preserves prior rulings and service orders affecting the parties.
What happened
In Ashton, et al. v. al Qaeda Islamic Army, et al., the plaintiffs asked to amend their complaint under a federal rule governing changes to pleadings.
The court found that the proposed amendments were not futile, would not cause undue delay or prejudice to the Taliban, and were not made in bad faith. The amendments added the parties identified in the plaintiffs’ exhibits to the action against the Taliban and supplemented, rather than replaced, the existing Sixth Amended Complaint.
The court granted the motion, kept prior rulings and judgments in effect, and ruled that additional service on the Taliban was unnecessary. Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn issued the order.
The detailed version
- Ashton v. Al Qaeda Islamic · No. 1:02-cv-06977
- George Daniels
- Jan. 12, 2023
Background
The Ashton plaintiffs moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 to amend their complaint. Rule 15 generally allows a party to change its complaint with the court’s permission, which courts ordinarily should grant when fairness requires. The motion was filed at ECF No. 8821 in the main multidistrict-litigation docket.
Court’s Analysis
The court stated that the proposed claims were not futile, would not unduly delay the proceedings or prejudice the Taliban, and were not submitted in bad faith or for an improper delaying purpose. Based on those findings, the court granted the Ashton plaintiffs’ motion.
Order
The court ordered that the underlying Sixth Amended Complaint in Ashton, No. 02-cv-06977, be amended to include as parties the persons or entities identified in the Ashton plaintiffs’ exhibits at ECF No. 8822-1 in the action against the Taliban. The amendments supplement, but do not replace, the Sixth Amended Complaint. The court also ordered that prior rulings, orders, and judgments remain effective as to all parties; that additional service on the Taliban was not required because of the amendments; and that prior service orders, including the order allowing service by publication at ECF No. 445, continue to apply. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 8821 and the related motion at ECF No. 1895 in Ashton. The order was signed by Sarah Netburn, United States Magistrate Judge.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.