Carib Ocean Shipping, Inc. v. Armas

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the trial court abused its discretion by denying the defendant's motion to amend its answer to include the affirmative defense of workers' compensation immunity
• concluding that there was no prejudice where proposed amended answer raising new affirmative defense was filed \shortly before trial\ and despite defendant's concession that the failure to include defense in previous pleading \was pure negligence\
• stating that “any prejudice which may be deemed to have existed ordinarily should be remedied, not by denial of the amendment, but by a continuance”
• noting “amendments may be denied when there is a sufficient showing of prejudice to the opposing party”
• noting “amendments may be denied when there is a sufficient showing of prejudice to the opposing party”
• interests of justice were far better served by determining a case on its substantive merits, rather than a mistake in pleading

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).