Court Opinion

ID: 9782396
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-30 18:28:17.035465+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:34:58.305116
License: Public Domain

Allegrucci, J.,
concurring and dissenting: I concur with the majority that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in not allowing the plaintiff to proceed anonymously. I dissent from the majority holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the plaintiff to amend his petition using his real name.
The majority recognizes that leave to amend should freely be given. The majority finds no apparent or declared reason for the trial court to deny the motion to amend. There is no undue delay, bad faith, or dilatory motive on the part of the plaintiff, nor will defendant suffer undue prejudice if plaintiff s motion to amend is granted. In addition, judicial economy is certainly not served by denying the plaintiff the right to amend.
The majority reasons that the trial court has a “certain amount of discretion” and since the plaintiff s request to amend was made after the trial court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss, it was not an abuse of discretion. It seems obvious that the motion to amend necessarily has to be filed after the defendant’s motion was granted. Further, that the trial court has a certain amount of discretion is a given; the issue is whether it has abused that discretion.
*951It makes no sense to me to require the plaintiff to refile the petition and repeat the whole process simply to insert his real name. I would remand with directions to grant the plaintiff s motion to amend his petition.