Ware v. Brann
- Robert Lehrburger
- 1:21-cv-02028
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Ware v. Brann, Judge Lehrburger denied Ware’s amendment motion and struck the proposed complaint because the late changes lacked good cause and prejudiced defendants.
Walter Ware’s request to amend his complaint was denied, and the proposed amended complaint was struck; the defendants avoided reopening discovery and continued under the existing summary-judgment schedule.
What happened
In Ware v. Brann, Walter Ware asked to file an amended complaint after the deadline for amended pleadings had passed. The court considered his letter motion.
The court noted that discovery had closed and that the parties were preparing summary-judgment motions. The proposed changes would add another year of alleged violations, raise new factual issues, and require discovery to be reopened.
Judge Robert W. Lehrburger denied the motion to amend and struck the proposed amended complaint. The existing summary-judgment schedule remained in place, and the Clerk was directed to mail Ware a copy of the order.
The detailed version
- Ware v. Brann · No. 1:21-cv-02028
- Robert Lehrburger
- Aug. 1, 2023
Background
Walter Ware filed a letter motion at Docket 99 seeking permission to file an amended complaint. The deadline for amended pleadings was March 1, 2022. By the time of the motion, discovery had closed and the court had set a schedule for summary-judgment briefing.
Court’s Analysis
The court explained that, because the amendment deadline had expired, Ware had to show good cause for the late amendment. The court also noted that amendment may be denied because of factors including futility, undue delay, bad faith, or undue prejudice.
The court found that Ware had not provided a basis showing good cause for seeking the amendments so late. It further found that the proposed amendments would add an additional year of alleged violations, introduce new factual issues, and require discovery to be reopened. The court concluded that the resulting delay and litigation burden would unduly prejudice the defendants.
Ruling
Judge Robert W. Lehrburger denied the motion to amend. The court also struck the proposed amended complaint filed at Docket 100. The previously ordered summary-judgment schedule remained in place. The order listed deadlines of September 12, October 24, December 5, and December 29, 2023, for the parties’ respective filings, and stated that if Ware did not seek summary judgment, briefing would begin with the defendants’ motion due October 24, 2023. The Clerk was directed to mail Ware a copy of the order and record service.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.