From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pennick v. Lystad

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA
Aug 3, 2017
CASE NO. 3:17-cv-5152 RJB-TLF (W.D. Wash. Aug. 3, 2017)

Opinion

CASE NO. 3:17-cv-5152 RJB-TLF

08-03-2017

CURLIN PENNICK, III, Plaintiff, v. ERIN LYSTAD, et al., Defendants.


ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO AMEND AS MODIFIED

Plaintiff Curlin Pennick, III, seeks leave to amend his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights complaint to add Dr. Steve Hammond as a defendant, plead additional factual details, and request preliminary injunctive relief. Dkt. 23. Defendants oppose the amendment only as to adding Dr. Hammond as a party. Dkt. 25. Mr. Pennick concedes that adding Dr. Hammond is not necessary, and has provided another draft of his proposed amendment. Dkt. 26, Exhibit D, pp. 4-12. Mr. Pennick did not sign his reply or the proposed amendment.

Having reviewed the motion, the Court finds that Mr. Pennick's motion to amend the complaint should be granted and Mr. Pennick is granted leave to file a complete and signed amendment as set forth in Exhibit D.

DISCUSSION

A party seeking to amend his complaint may seek leave of the Court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). Federal Rule 15(a) indicates that "[t]he court should freely give leave when justice so requires." Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). Although this is a liberal standard, leave to amend is discretionary and courts have identified a number of factors to consider when determining whether leave is appropriate. See, e.g., Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). These factors include undue prejudice, futility, and undue delay. Id.

Although Dr. Hammond was not involved in his health care, Mr. Pennick sought to add Dr. Hammond in order to secure injunctive relief. Dkt. 23. Defendants assure Mr. Pennick and the Court that if injunctive relief is appropriate, it may be enforced against Dr. Smith, the Facility Medical Director at Stafford Creek Corrections Center, who is already named as a defendant. Dkt. 25.

In reply, Mr. Pennick concedes that it is not necessary to include Dr. Hammond and attached another version of his amended complaint. Dkt. 26, Exhibit D. However, the proposed amendment is not signed.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

(1) Plaintiff's motion under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) to amend is GRANTED. Plaintiff is directed to file a signed amended complaint by SEPTEMBER 5, 2017.

(2) The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Order to Plaintiff and to counsel for Defendants.

DATED this 3rd day of August, 2017.

/s/_________

Theresa L. Fricke

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

Pennick v. Lystad

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA
Aug 3, 2017
CASE NO. 3:17-cv-5152 RJB-TLF (W.D. Wash. Aug. 3, 2017)
Case details for

Pennick v. Lystad

Case Details

Full title:CURLIN PENNICK, III, Plaintiff, v. ERIN LYSTAD, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

Date published: Aug 3, 2017

Citations

CASE NO. 3:17-cv-5152 RJB-TLF (W.D. Wash. Aug. 3, 2017)