Free Order on Motion to Amend/Correct - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 62.3 kB
Pages: 1
Date: April 25, 2007
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 323 Words, 2,089 Characters
Page Size: 566.4 x 750.72 pts
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/22489/58.pdf

Download Order on Motion to Amend/Correct - District Court of Connecticut ( 62.3 kB)


Preview Order on Motion to Amend/Correct - District Court of Connecticut
Case 3:03-cv-00372:AVC Document 58 Filed 04/23/2007 Page 1 of 1
, UNITEDSTATES DISTRICT COURT . `
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
KELLY PHANEUF, : *
PIaIntIff, CIVII N0. 3:03CV00372 (AVC) *
ROSE MARIE CIPRIANO, DORENE M. .
FRAIKIN, KATHLEEN BINKOWSKI, 1 : ‘ .
TOWN OF PLAINVILLE and PLAINVILLE :
BOARD OF EDUCATION, : .
Defendants. I: MARCH 28, 2007
\
DEFENQANTS’ REQUEST FOR LEAVE TO AMEND THEIR ANSWER AND
. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES DATED MAY Z9, 2003
3£'03CV0372 (AVC) April `, 2007. This is an action for damages. It is brough
pursuant 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The plaintiff, Kelly Phaneuf, alleges that th
defendants, the Town of Plainville and the Plainville Board of Education, cause
her to be searched in violation of the Fourth Amendment, to the United State
Constitution. ,.
The defendants now move to amend their answer to include res judicata an
collateral estoppel as special defenses. Phaneuf, has not responded to the withi
motion.
I The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permit defendants to amend thei
pleadings with leave ofthe court, and further provide that such "leave shall b
freely given when justice so requires." Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a). The Seconl
Circuit has interpreted this provision as favoring "amendment absent a showin·
by the non-moving party of bad faith or undue prejudice.” Anthony v. City of Ne
York, 339 F.3d 129, 138 (2d Cir. 2003) (citing State Teachers Ret. Bd. v. Fluo
Corp., 654 Fr2d 843, 856 (2d Cir. 1981)).
. Because the non—moving party, -Phaneuf, has not replied to the within motion
the court concludes that she has failed to make a showing of badwfaith or undu·
prejudice. As such, the motion to amend the answer (document no. A iss,@,,RANTED
Within ten days of the entry of this order, the defendantsnyay fsiiyle answe;
that includes res judicata and collateral estoppel as specia.lij—1 defe=P1ses,;‘=‘~¤·“
SO ORDERED. ·Qfj “j iss ....
· U U
,_ ‘ /v , t. .... ll /1. E , y T3
I ..Alfred . Covelko, U..S>.D.J. , . (5
II I ,·\,...n'\'\-l\/J