In re Merritt & Chapman Derrick & Wrecking Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that even when the factual basis for a new claim is the same as the factual basis of the original claim, new theories can nevertheless pose unexpected surprise when asserted for the first time in the late stages of litigation
• noting district courts may consider concerns with protracted litigation in deciding whether to grant leave to amend a pleading
• unfair prejudice where amendment “would deprive [non-movant] of some of the benefits of briefing and surviving summary judgment” and “subject [non-movant] to reopened discovery”
• “[T]he Seventh Circuit has approved denials of leave to amend because the moving party appeared to be trying to avoid the consequences of a summary 9 judgment decision.”
• “If the moving party fails to provide any explanation for not filing its amendment sooner or if the explanation it provides is inadequate, that will weigh towards denying leave to amend.”
• “Undue delay alone is insufficient to support denial of leave to amend, but it may militate towards a denial when combined with another factor, often unfair prejudice to the nonmoving party.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).