Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-01037/USCOURTS-casd-3_12-cv-01037-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract

---

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

2 

3 

4 

6 

7 

8 

9 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

17 

18 

19 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

27 

28 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

MERLE FERGUSON, an individual, SUSAN 

DONOHUE, an individual, and 

CASE NO. l2-CV-1037 BEN (JMA) 

WORLDWIDE FOOD SERVICES, INC., a ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 

Utah Corporation, AMEND ANSWER 

Plaintiffs, [ECF No. 31] 

vs. 

DANIEL KORREY, an individual, and 

DOES 1-20 inclusive, 

Defendants. 

Presently before the Court is Defendant Daniel Korrey's motion to amend his Answer. ECF 

No. 31. Plaintiffs did not file a written opposition as required by Civil Local Rule 7.l.e.2. The matter 

will be decided on the record without oral argument pursuant to Ci vii Local Rule 7.1. d.l. 

At issue is whether Korrey was terminated by Prime Multimedia, Inc., the predecessor to 

Plaintiff Worldwide Food Services, Inc., in March 2006. In his Answer, filed May 29,2012, Korrey 

admits that he was terminated at that time. He further admits that he was not an employee at the 

company in 2007. Korrey now explains, however, that he simply thought the issue ofhis termination 

not worth contesting at the outset. He has since changed his mind. He seeks to change four related 

admissions into denials. Complicating the matter is that both parties have a motion summary 

judgment pending before this Court. 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure lS(a)(2) permits a party to amend its pleadings prior to trial 

- 1 - 12cvl037 

Case 3:12-cv-01037-BEN-JMA Document 33 Filed 12/11/12 Page 1 of 2
5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

with leave ofthe court. It states that a court "should freely give leave when justice so requires." The 

2 Ninth Circuit has stated that "leave to amend should be granted unless amendment would cause 

3 prejudice to the opposing party, is sought in bad faith, is futile, or creates undue delay." Johnson v. 

4 Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607 (9th Cir. 1992). 

The Court is reluctant to permit amendment with dispositive motions pending. However, 

6 because it is early in the case and the scheduling order's deadline for amendments had not yet passed, 

7 the risk of prejUdice and delay is small. The Court will permit Korrey to amend. The hearing 

8 scheduled for December 17, 2012 is VACATED. The clerk shall file Exhibit 2 of Korrey's Motion 

9 to Amend (ECF No. 31) as his First Amended Answer. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

11 

12 DATED: December42012 

13 

14 

16 

17 

18 

19 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

27 

28 

- 2 - 12cvl037 

Case 3:12-cv-01037-BEN-JMA Document 33 Filed 12/11/12 Page 2 of 2