CALVERT v. OMNI MEDICAL, LLC

No. 2:17-cv-00722-KJM-DB.

DEBRA CALVERT, Plaintiff, v. OMNI MEDICAL, LLC, ROGER B.STEPHENS, M.D., A CALIFORNIA PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION, DR.JAMES M. KIM, individually, DR. SHARON G.LEANO, individually, and Does 1-25, Defendants.

United States District Court, E.D. California.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Cause: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act
Nature of Suit: 446 Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Debra Calvert, Plaintiff, represented by Catherine M. Corfee , Corfee Stone & Associates.


ORDER

KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, District Judge.

Plaintiff moves to file a second amended complaint. ECF No. 9. Her complaint claims the owner of a medical facility violated the Americans with Disabilities Act. Id. Her operative complaint erroneously lists former defendant Omni Medical, LLC as the property owner. See First Am. Compl., ECF No. 4. The proposed second amended complaint changes the property owner's name to CPI-Omni Medical, a Delaware Limited Liability Company. See Ex. A to ECF No. 9. Omni Medical, LLC opposed the motion, arguing plaintiff's amendment did not dismiss Omni Medical, LLC from the lawsuit. Opp'n, ECF No. 12. A week later, plaintiff dismissed Omni Medical, LLC, with prejudice. Voluntary Dismissal, ECF No. 15; Order Confirming Dismissal, ECF No. 16. No remaining defendant opposes the motion.

The federal rules mandate that leave to amend "be freely given when justice so requires." Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). "This policy is to be applied with extreme liberality." Eminence Capital, LLC v. Aspeon, Inc., 316 F.3d 1048, 1051 (9th Cir. 2003) (citation and quotation marks omitted). Before granting leave, a court considers any potential bad faith, delay, or futility regarding the proposed amendment, and the potential prejudice to the opposing party. Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962); see also Smith v. Pac. Prop. Dev. Co., 358 F.3d 1097, 1101 (9th Cir. 2004). "The party opposing amendment bears the burden of showing prejudice." DCD Programs, Ltd. v. Leighton, 833 F.2d 183, 187 (9th Cir. 1987). Absent prejudice, there is a strong presumption in favor of granting leave to amend. Eminence Capital, 316 F.3d at 1052.

Here, plaintiff attaches to her motion a redlined version of the proposed amended complaint. ECF No. 9, Ex. A. The only substantive alteration is changing "Omni Medical, LLC" to "CPI-Omni Medical, a Delaware Limited Liability Company." Id. Because the remaining defendants do not oppose this motion, and because the court is aware of no prejudice or delay that would result from allowing this amendment, plaintiff's motion is GRANTED. The second amended complaint shall be filed within seven days of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

This resolves ECF No. 9.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases