Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A standard directing courts to grant a party's request for leave to amend its pleading. The standard favors resolution of disputes on the merits rather than technical pleading defects. Courts apply the standard by denying leave only upon a showing of undue delay, bad faith, futility, or undue prejudice to the opposing party.
Sources & Authorities
How it applies
Common Examples
2
Adding Counterclaim After Discovery
SkyCore answered a supplier's complaint denying liability. After reviewing billing records produced in discovery, SkyCore moved for leave to add a counterclaim for unpaid invoices. The court granted the motion. The invoices arose from the same commercial relationship and the plaintiff showed no concrete prejudice from the addition of the claim.
Correcting Defense After Inspection
Aquaslide answered a personal-injury complaint by admitting it manufactured the slide. An on-site inspection later revealed the slide was not its product. Aquaslide moved for leave to amend its answer to deny manufacture. The court granted the motion because the amendment allowed the case to proceed on accurate facts without prejudice to the plaintiff.
What standard governs a motion for leave to amend after the period for amendment as of right has expired?+
The court should freely give leave when justice so requires. This standard is deliberately generous and permits amendment unless the opposing party shows undue delay, bad faith, futility, or undue prejudice.
Supporting sources
Does a prior amendment as of right bar a later motion for leave to amend?+
No. The one-time right to amend as of right is separate from the court's authority to grant leave. A party may still seek leave after using the automatic amendment, and the court applies the justice-so-requires standard to the new request.
Supporting sources
When may a court properly deny leave to amend under the justice-so-requires standard?+
Denial is proper only when the opposing party demonstrates undue delay without explanation, bad faith, repeated failure to cure defects, futility of the amendment, or real prejudice such as the need to redo completed discovery close to trial.
Supporting sources
371 U.S. 178 (1962)Civil Procedure
…done no more than state an alternative theory for recovery. Rule 15 (a) declares that leave to amend “shall be freely given when justice so requires”; this mandate is to be heeded. See generally, 3 Moore, Federal Practice (2d ed. 1948), ¶¶ 15.08, 15.10. If the underlying facts or circumstances relied upon by a plaintiff may be a proper…