Hale v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that leave to amend should be denied when “the amendment would be futile[,]” or “clearly insufficient”
• holding that for a motion to amend to be denied for futility, the amendment must be “clearly insufficient or frivolous on its face.”
• holding that “[l]eave to amend, however, should only be denied on the ground of futility when the proposed amendment is clearly insufficient or frivolous on its face”
• holding that “[l]eave to amend, however, should only be denied on the ground of futility when the proposed amendment is clearly insufficient or frivolous on its face”
• explaining that proposed amendment may be denied as futile when it “is clearly insufficient . . . on its face”
• noting that leave to amend should only be denied “on the ground of futility when the proposed amendment is clearly insufficient . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).