Fahim v. Marriott Hotel Services, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that when the plaintiff fails to show good cause, “the district court’s denial of leave to amend was not an abuse of discretion”
• reasoning that a district court “has broad discretion to preserve the integrity and purpose of the pretrial order.”
• finding that non-moving party “would have been prejudiced if it had been forced to defend against a new claim ... so late in the litigation”
• ruling against movant because non-movant “would have been prejudiced if it had been forced to defend against a new claim . . . so late in the litigation”
• finding prima facie case of racial discrimination under Title II of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000a
• finding prejudice where the defendant would have “been forced to defend against a new claim . . . so late in the litigation”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).