Legal Opinion
Hume v. Hertz Corp.
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided February 14, 1986No. Civ. H-85-688(AHN), H-85-922(AHN)PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON PLAINTIFFS’ MOTIONS TO AMEND THEIR COMPLAINTS
NEVAS, District Judge.
These two wrongful death actions were recently consolidated for joint discovery and trial. Fed.R.Civ.P. 42(a). Jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship. 28 U.S.C. Section 1332. The plaintiffs now move to amend their complaints under Rule 15(a), Fed.R.Civ.P. They seek to correct insufficiently stated claims and to cite proper statutory authority. In addition, they each seek leave to add a second state law claim to their complaints. The plaintiff Hume seeks to join this action in her individual capacity to…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Lehman Brothers v. ScheinSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Meredith v. Winter HavenSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
- Lettie D. Evans v. Syracuse City School DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1983
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Diginet, Incorporated v. Western Union Ats, Incorporated, Third-Party-Defendant-Appellant v. City of Chicago, Third-Party-Plaintiff-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992
- Lopez v. SmileyDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2005
- Connecticut Pipe Trades Health Fund v. Philip Morris, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2001
- Moffitt v. Town of BrookfieldDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1991
- Ryoko Ito v. Macro Energy, Inc.Supreme Court of The Commonwealth of The Northern Mariana Islands · 1993
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.