Fund for Animals v. Hall
District Court, District of Columbia
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
RICARDO M. URBINA, District Judge.
Granting the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Supplement the Complaint
I. INTRODUCTION
The action is before the court on the plaintiffs’ motion to supplement their complaint, adding three claims and seven plaintiffs. The Fish and Wildlife Service and the defendant-intervenors (collectively “the defendants”) oppose the plaintiffs’ proposed supplement due to the delay it will impose on the proceedings. Because the judicial interest in addressing all the legally similar claims together outweighs any prejudice the defendants may suffer, the court…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Griffin v. School Bd. of Prince Edward Cty.Supreme Court of the United States · 1964
- Richard Atchinson v. District of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1996
- United States v. Hicks, Eric A.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2002
- Hall v. Central Intelligence AgencyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2006
- Manual De J. Gomez v. Jerry v. Wilson, Chief of PoliceCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1973
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Landmark Health Solutions LLC v. Not for Profit Hospital CorporationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
- American Civil Construction, LLC v. Fort Myer Construction Corp.District Court, District of Columbia · 2017
- Powell v. Internal Revenue ServiceDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2017
- Calixto v. United States Department of the ArmyDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2021
- Cape Fear Public Utility Authority v. The Chemours Company FC, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2025
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.