Opinion
Civil Action No. 11-cv-01816-PAB-KLM
11-30-2011
BILLY D. COTTRELL, an individual, Plaintiff, v. LEPRINO FOODS COMPANY, Defendant.
ORDER
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on Defendant's Unopposed Motion of Defendant Leprino Foods Company to File Additional Affirmative Defenses [Docket No. 10; Filed November 21, 2011] (the "Motion"). The Scheduling Order governing this case provides that the deadline for joinder of parties and amendment of pleadings is December 22, 2011. Scheduling Order [#9] at 7 § 9(a). Accordingly, Defendant's Motion was timely filed.
The Court has discretion to grant a party leave to amend its pleadings. Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2) ("The court should freely give leave when justice so requires."). "In the absence of any apparent or declared reason - such 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. - the leave sought should, as the rules require, be 'freely given.'" Id. (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2)). Potential prejudice to an opposing party is the most important factor in considering whether a party should be permitted to amend its pleading. Minter v. Prime Equip. Co., 451 F.3d 1196, 1207 (10th Cir. 2006). "Courts typically find prejudice only when the [proposed] amendment unfairly affects the [opposing party] in terms of preparing [his] defense to [claims asserted in the] amendment." Id. (quotation omitted).
After carefully reviewing Defendant's Additional Affirmative Defenses [#10-1], the Court finds that Plaintiff will not be prejudiced by allowing the filing of the Additional Affirmative Defenses. Moreover, this case is still in its early stages, and Plaintiff has ample time to prepare. The deadline for the completion of discovery is still more than five months away, and the deadline for filing dispositive motions is June 4, 2012. Scheduling Order [#9] at 7-8 §§ 9(b) and (c). The Court also finds that Defendant has demonstrated good cause for amending with additional affirmative defenses. Permitting such amendment will benefit both parties and the Court by clarifying the issues in the case.
For the foregoing reasons, and considering that leave to amend should be freely given,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion [#10] is GRANTED. Defendant's Additional Affirmative Defenses [#10-1] shall be considered a supplement to Defendant's Answer [#6].
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall accept Defendant's Additional Affirmative Defenses [#10-1] for filing as of the date of this Order.
DATED: November 30, 2011 at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:
Kristen L. Mix
United States Magistrate Judge