United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Northern Division
OPINION AND ORDER
MYRON H. THOMPSON, District Judge.
This lawsuit is before the court on plaintiff Sundee Ann Davis's motion for leave to file a third amended complaint, which adds a new cause of action against defendant Automatic Food Service. Automatic Food argues that the allowance of the amendment would be untimely and prejudicial. Based on the representations made on the record today and for the reasons that follow, the motion for leave to file a third amended complaint will be granted.
I. LEGAL STANDARD
Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that, after a responsive pleading has been served, leave to amend "shall be freely given when justice so requires." A plaintiff should generally be allowed to test her claim on the merits, but the liberal amendment policy prescribed by Rule 15 does not mean that leave will be granted in all instances. Indeed, district courts may consider such factors as "undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of the movant, repeated failure to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed, undue prejudice to the opposing party by virtue of allowance of the amendment, futility of the amendment, etc." in determining whether "justice so requires" that leave to amend be granted. Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178 (1962); see also Grayson v. K Mart Corp., 79 F.3d 1086, 1110 (11th Cir. 1996); Courtney v. Clark, 2007 WL 2786368, at *1 (M.D. Ala. 2007) (Thompson, J.).
II. FACTUAL HISTORY
This case arises out of a collision on an Alabama road in September 2012. Reading the facts as garnered from the complaint, the court distills that Davis was traveling northbound on the road while defendant Melvin Little and defendant James Leon McGaughy were traveling southbound on the same road. McGaughy hit Little from behind, sending Little into the oncoming lane of traffic, where he collided with Davis. At the time of the collision, Little was talking on his cell phone to get directions and was employed by defendant Automatic Food Service.
III. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
September 18, 2012: The car wreck at issue in this case occurs.
April 25, 2014: Davis files first complaint.
May 12, 2014: Davis files first amended complaint.
May 22, 2014: Automatic Food files an answer to first amended complaint.
August 13, 2014: Davis moves for leave to file second amended complaint. It does not affect claims against Automatic Food.
August 18, 2014: Court grants leave to file second ...