Legal Opinion
Patoski v. Jackson
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided March 13, 2007No. Civil Action 05-11086-RCLPublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S SECOND MOTION TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT
ALEXANDER, United States Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff Richard S. Patoski (“Pato-ski”) files the instant motion seeking leave to amend his First Amended Complaint to “add claims for race discrimination in connection with his non-selection for the Community Builder position.” From the outset, this Court looks to Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a), noting that “leave [to amend a complaint] shall be freely given when justice so requires.” However, Rule 15(a) does not provide the courts with a rubber stamp to simply allow every motion to amend without…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Richard H. Hatch, Jr. v. Department for Children, Youth and Their Families (State of Rhode Island), Steven Brown and Mary McKee ProposedCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2001
- Kenneth C. Antol v. William J. Perry, Secretary Department of Defense, (Defense Logistics Agency)Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1996
- Ollie LATTIMORE, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. POLAROID CORPORATION, Defendant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1996
- Jorge v. RumsfeldCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2005
- 53 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1814, 54 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 40,262 C. Roland Powers v. Grinnell Corporation, C. Roland Powers v. Grinnell CorporationCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1990
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Posada v. Acp Facility Servs., Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2019
- Crisp Human Capital Ltd. v. Authoria Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2009
- Beaupin v. Boston UniversityDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2025
- PINKNEY v. MEADVILLE, PENNSYLVANIADistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2021
- Posada v. SuarezDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2019
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.