Legal Opinion
Banks v. York
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided September 18, 2006No. Civil Action 05-1514 (ESH)PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
HUVELLE, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs “Motion to File Supplement to Third Amended Complaint” and defendants’ motion for an extension of time to file a response. For the reasons stated below, the Court will deny the former and grant the latter motion.
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allow for the filing of a supplemental pleading so that a plaintiff may “set[j forth transactions or occurrences or events which have happened since the date of the pleading sought to be supplemented.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(d). Leave to file a supplemental complaint is left to the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Swierkiewicz v. Sorema N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Myrna O'Dell Firestone v. Leonard K. FirestoneCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1996
- James v. Hurson Associates, Inc. v. GlickmanCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2000
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- McWILLIAMS BALLARD v. BROADWAY MANAGEMENT COMPANY, INC.District Court, District of Columbia · 2009
- Lannan Found. v. GingoldCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2017
- James Madison Project v. Department of JusticeDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2016
- Feinman v. Federal Bureau of InvestigationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2010
- Aguiar v. Drug Enforcement Admin.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.