Elizabeth Dole, Secretary of Labor v. Arco Chemical Company and Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission

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 plaintiff’s claims of prejudice due to the possibility of some additional discovery and the need to redraft a motion for summary judgment were insufficient to deny leave to amend
• noting that nonmoving party must demonstrate that “its ability to present its case would be seriously impaired were amendment allowed”
• holding that the administrative law judge had abused his discretion by failing to allow amendment of the complaint and noting that the rule allowing liberal amendment of pleadings “ensures that a particular claim will be decided on the merits rather than on technicalities.”
• noting that leave to amend should be granted freely in order to “ensure that a particular claim will be decided on the merits rather than on technicalities.”
• noting that “[t]he mere fact that a summary judgment motion will need to be revised does not, without more, establish that prejudice will result from permitting the plaintiff to amend”
• observing that Rule 15(a) “embodies a liberal approach to amendment . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).