Legal Opinion
Long v. Lipkins
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 4, 1983No. Civ. A. No. 80-4138PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
TROUTMAN, District Judge.
Motions pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a) are committed to a Court’s sound discretion which should be generally exercised in favor of amendment. The breadth of judicial discretion is evidenced, in part, by the fact that courts which have considered the issue at bar have arrived at apparently conflicting conclusions.
In the exercise of our discretion we are guided by principles relied upon by other courts which have had the opportunity to consider the propriety of permitting a defendant to amend its answer and contest an issue previously admitted. Cases…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- United States v. HoughamSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
- David v. Crompton & Knowles Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1973
- Roesberg v. Johns-Manville Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1981
- Bank Building & Equipment Corp. of America v. Mack Local 677 Federal Credit UnionDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1980
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Gundlach v. ReinsteinDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1996
- Haynes v. Syntek Finance Corp.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1995
- Darmanchev v. RoytshteynDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2005
- Johnson v. GoldsteinDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1994
- Martinez v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1990
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.