Ohio Valley Environmental Coalition, Inc., et al v. Shepard Boone Coal Co., No. 2:2015cv01488 - Document 20 (S.D.W. Va. 2015)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting plaintiffs' 12 MOTION for Leave to Amend Complaint; directing that plaintiffs' proposed amended complaint, [ECF 12, Ex. 1], is substituted as the operative complaint in this case. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 12/22/2015. (cc: counsel of record; any unrepresented party) (taq)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON DIVISION OHIO VALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL COALITION, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:15-cv-01488 SHEPARD BOONE COAL CO., Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint (the “Motion to Amend”). (ECF No. 12.) On February 4, 2015, Plaintiffs filed the Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief and for Civil Penalties (the “Complaint”), in which Plaintiffs allege that Defendant violated provisions of the Clean Water Act. (ECF No. 1.) Defendant filed its answer to the Complaint on April 6, 2015. (ECF No. 5.) On August 10, 2015, Plaintiffs filed the Motion to Amend, in which Plaintiffs request to “withdraw completely Plaintiffs’ claims for civil penalties and narrow the requested relief to only injunctive relief.” (ECF No. 12 at 2.) Plaintiffs attached their proposed amended complaint to the Motion to Amend. (See id., Ex. 1.) To date, Defendant has not filed a responsive briefing to the Motion to Amend. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 permits amendment of a complaint more than twentyone days after service “only with the opposing party’s written consent or the court’s leave.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). “The court should freely give leave when justice so requires.” Id. Under Rule 15(a), “leave to amend should be denied only when the amendment would be prejudicial to the opposing party, there has been bad faith on the part of the moving party, or amendment would be futile.” Matrix Capital Mgmt. Fund, LP v. BearingPoint, Inc., 576 F.3d 172, 193 (4th Cir. 2009) (citing Laber v. Harvey, 438 F.3d 404, 426 (4th Cir. 2006)). This liberal amendment approach “gives effect to the federal policy in favor of resolving cases on their merits instead of disposing of them on technicalities.” Id. (citation omitted). Plaintiffs’ proposed amendment of the Complaint would not be prejudicial to Defendant, there is no indication in the record that Plaintiffs have acted in bad faith, and the Court is not aware of any evidence indicating the amendment would be futile. The Court therefore GRANTS the Motion to Amend. (ECF 12.) Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that Plaintiffs’ proposed amended complaint, (ECF 12, Ex. 1), is substituted as the operative complaint in this case. IT IS SO ORDERED. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented party. ENTER: December 22, 2015

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.