Opinion
Civil Action No. 06-cv-01522-ZLW-BNB.
April 11, 2007
ORDER
The matter before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion For Leave To Amend Complaint. Although, in general, leave to amend pleadings shall be freely granted when justice so requires, a party must show good cause to amend a pleading after the Scheduling Order deadline, which in this case was November 17, 2006. Plaintiff contends that testimony from depositions taken in January 2007 supports amendment; however, Plaintiff has failed to submit a proposed Amended Complaint, and thus the Court does not know precisely what Plaintiff proposes to add to his pleading. Moreover, leave to amend should not be granted where amendment would be futile. Here, evidence that Defendant Chase at one point said to Defendant Sitter that Chase did not understand "why [Sitter] had a business relationship with Rasure" recounts not a statement of fact but rather an expression of opinion, which is protected by the First Amendment and cannot form the basis of a tort claim of intentional interference with contract. Accordingly, it is
See TV Communications Network, Inc. v. Turner Network Television, Inc., 964 F.2d 1022, 1028 (10th Cir. 1992).
See Jefferson County School Dist. No. R-1 v. Moody's Investor's Services, Inc., 175 F.3d 848, 856-58 (10th Cir. 1999).
ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion For Leave To Amend Complaint (Doc. No. 81) is denied. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that in the future Plaintiff shall comply with D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1A.