Opinion ID: 70507
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Denial of GTEDPC's Motion to Amend its Amended

Text: Complaint 60 The district court's order denying GTEDPC's motion to amend its Amended Complaint is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. Cannon v. Macon County, 1 F.3d 1558, 1565-66 (11th Cir.1993), modified, 15 F.3d 1022 (1994). 61 On May 13, 1992, the district court entered a docket control order stating that [t]he joinder of other parties and the amendments to pleadings shall be completed no later than April 15, 1993. GTEDPC filed its motion to amend on April 5, 1993. Thus, GTEDPC's motion was timely. 62 A thorough review of the record establish beyond a doubt that Blumberg must be made a defendant in this action if it is to have any permanent meaning. The accounts GTEDPC wishes to contact or has already contacted are regarded by Blumberg as his. The CMRs come and go; however, Blumberg always remains. This point is clearly illustrated by the following passage from the bench trial below. 63 THE COURT: You control [Trimen] 64 MR. BLUMBERG: National sales manager for the company. 65 THE COURT: Sir? 66 MR. BLUMBERG: National sales manager. 67 THE COURT: Well, I didn't ask that. I asked if you control [Trimen]. 68 MR. BLUMBERG: Yes, I do. 69 Without Blumberg being joined as a defendant, even if GTEDPC were to receive a favorable declaration against Trimen, that declaration would be a hollow victory. This dispute between GTEDPC and Blumberg must end. To accomplish that goal, Blumberg must be made a party to this litigation. Accordingly, we must reverse the district court's denial of GTEDPC's motion to amend its Amended Complaint.