Legal Opinion
Schwartz v. American Stores Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided May 5, 1958No. 22598PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
EGAN, District Judge.
The defendant moves to amend its answer so as to plead the statute of limitations. ’ It relies on Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S. C.A., which states inter alia that “leave [to amend] shall be freely given when justice so requires.”
Justice so requires where the granting of the motion results in no prejudice to the opposing party. Budd Co. v. United States. D.C.E.D.Pa.1956, 19 F.R.D. 346; Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. American Plumbing & Supply Co., D.C. E.D.Wis.1956, 19 F.R.D. 334; Bella v. Marine Transport Lines, D.C.S.D.N.Y. 1956, 18 F.R.D. 410;…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Emich Motors Corp. v. General Motors Corp.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1953
- Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. American Plumbing & Supply Co.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1956
- Downey v. PalmerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1939
- Kraushaar v. LeschinDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1944
- Bella v. Marine Transport Lines, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1956
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Bray v. BaylesCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1980