Goodridge v. Diamond Ranch Academy, No. 4:2022cv00102 - Document 42 (D. Utah 2023)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER granting 40 MOTION to Amend/Correct 32 Amended Complaint. Signed by Magistrate Judge Paul Kohler on 7/31/23 (alt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Goodridge v. Diamond Ranch Academy Doc. 42 Case 4:22-cv-00102-DN-PK Document 42 Filed 07/31/23 PageID.439 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH DEAN JEFFRIES L. GOODRIDGE, Individually and as the Natural Father and as Personal Representative of the Estate of TAYLOR GOODRIDGE, Deceased, and AMBERLYNN WIGTION, Individually and as the Natural Mother of TAYLOR GOODRIDGE, Deceased, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT Plaintiff, v. Case No. 4:22-cv-00102-DN-PK DIAMOND RANCH ACADEMY, INC.; a Utah Corporation; BIG SPRINGS PROPERTIES, District Judge David Nuffer Magistrate Judge Paul Kohler Defendants. This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint. 1 Plaintiffs seek to amend the Complaint to name additional Defendants and to include additional allegations. Defendants have not responded to the Motion and the time for doing so has expired. 2 Generally, once a responsive pleading is filed, “a party may amend its pleading only with the opposing party’s written consent or the court's leave.” 3 “The court should freely give leave when justice so requires.” 4 “In the absence of any apparent or declared reason—such as undue 1 Docket no. 40, filed July 12, 2023. 2 DUCivR 7-1(a)(4)(D)(ii) (“A response to a motion must be filed within 14 days after service of the motion.”) 3 Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). 4 Id. 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 4:22-cv-00102-DN-PK Document 42 Filed 07/31/23 PageID.440 Page 2 of 2 delay, bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of the movant, repeated failure to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed, undue prejudice to the opposing party by virtue of allowance of the amendment, futility of amendment, etc.—the leave sought should, as the rules require, be ‘freely given.’” 5 Here, there is no evidence of undue delay, bad faith, dilatory motive, repeated failures to cure, undue prejudice, or futility. Therefore, leave will be given. It is therefore ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File a Fourth Amended Complaint (Docket No. 40) is GRANTED. Plaintiffs shall file their Fourth Amended Complaint within fourteen (14) days of this Order. DATED this 31st day of July, 2023. BY THE COURT: PAUL KOHLER United States Magistrate Judge 5 Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962). 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
