Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

MOLDEA v. NEW YORK TIMES CO.

January 31, 1992

DAN E. MOLDEA, Plaintiff,
v.
THE NEW YORK TIMES COMPANY, Defendant.


PENN


The opinion of the court was delivered by: JOHN GARRETT PENN

ORDER

This case is before the Court on plaintiff, Dan E. Moldea's Motion to Amend Complaint.

 After responsive pleadings have been filed "a party may amend [his] pleading only by leave of Court or by written consent of the adverse party; and leave shall be freely given when justice so requires." Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a).

 Plaintiff seeks to "amend his complaint to add a new additional cause of action for breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation, promissory estoppel and interference with prospective business relations . . . ." Motion to Amend at 1. It is settled that where a defendant has filed a dispositive motion, as here, and plaintiff has opposed it, denial of permission to amend is proper. See Wilderness Society v. Griles, 262 U.S. App. D.C. 277, 824 F.2d 4, 19 (1987). Further, if a complaint as amended could not withstand a motion to dismiss, then the amendment should be denied as futile." *fn1" See Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182, 83 S. Ct. 227, 9 L. Ed. 2d 222 (1962).

 Accordingly, it is hereby

 ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to amend complaint is denied.

 Date: JAN 31 1992

 JOHN GARRETT PENN

 United States District ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.