Doe v. Nevada, No. CV-S-03-1500LRH(RJJ).
| Court | United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. United States District Courts. 9th Circuit. District of Nevada |
| Writing for the Court | Hicks |
| Citation | 356 F.Supp.2d 1123 |
| Docket Number | No. CV-S-03-1500LRH(RJJ). |
| Decision Date | 30 September 2004 |
| Parties | John DOE and Jane Doe, on behalf of themselves and as Guardians ad Litem for their minor child, Preschooler, Plaintiffs, v. The State of NEVADA, et. al., Defendants. |
v.
The State of NEVADA, et. al., Defendants.
Page 1124
Marianne Lanuti, Law Office of Marianne C. Lanuti, Henderson, NV, Niels Pearson, Pearson Patton Shea Foley & Kurtz, Las Vegas, NV, for Plaintiffs.
Bill Hoffman, Legal Department, Las Vegas, NV, Ed Irvin, Nevada Attorney General's Office, Carson City, NV, for Defendants.
HICKS, District Judge.
Presently before this Court is the Plaintiffs' motion to amend their complaint (Docket No. 35). Defendants Clark County School Board of Trustees, Clark County School District, Carlos Arturo Garcia, Charlene A. Green, Michael S. Harley, Kay Davis, Darryl Wyatt, and Kathleen LiSanti (collectively, the "Clark County Defendants") have filed an opposition to the motion (Docket No. 39), to which Plaintiffs subsequently replied (Docket No. 40). Upon review of the record and relevant law, the Court grants the Plaintiffs' motion.
Plaintiffs request leave from this Court to amend their complaint in order to include new claims for negligence. Plaintiffs assert that only recently did they uncover evidence through discovery which indicated that a claim may exist for negligence based on the Defendants' failure to comply with two reporting statutes, the Aversive Intervention Law, outlined in Nevada Revised
Page 1125
Statute § 388.521, and Nevada Revised Statute § 432B.220, which requires certain individuals to report child abuse within 24 hours if they know or have reasonable cause to believe that a child has been abused or neglected. According to Plaintiffs, any failure on the Defendants' part to comply with these statutes gives rise to a claim for negligence.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a) provides that a trial court shall grant leave to amend freely "when justice so requires." However, the Ninth Circuit has outlined four reasons why a Court may refuse to grant leave to amend: (1) undue delay; (2) bad faith; (3) futility of amendment; and (4) prejudice to the opposing party. Forsyth v. Humana, Inc., 114 F.3d 1467 (9th Cir.1997). The Defendants' sole argument in opposition to the Plaintiffs' motion is that the amendment proposed by Plaintiffs would be futile.
When a motion to amend is opposed on the grounds that amendment would be futile, the standard of review in considering the motion is akin to that undertaken by a court in determining the sufficiency of a complaint which is challenged for failure to state a claim under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 12(b)(6). See Farina v. Compuware Corp., 256 F.Supp.2d 1033,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Velazquez v. Midland Funding, LLC, Case No. 1:18-cv-00043-CWD
...complaint which is challenged for failure to state a claim under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 12(b)(6)." Doe v. Nevada, 356 F. Supp. 2d 1123, 1125 (D. Nev. 2004). "A Rule 12(b)(6)Page 12 dismissal may be based on either a 'lack of a cognizable legal theory' or 'the absence of ......
-
Watts v. Starbucks Corp., Case No. 2:17-cv-00272-DCN
...Valley Solar LLC v. Thomas & Betts Corp., No. 4:16-cv-00070-DCN, 2017 WL 5613009 (D. Idaho Nov. 21, 2017) (quoting Doe v. Nevada, 356 F. Supp. 2d 1123, 1125 (D. Nev. 2004)).IV. ANALYSISA. Motion to Dismiss Starbuck's Motion to Dismiss is easily resolved as the parties largely agree. First, ......
-
Arbon Valley Solar LLC v. Thomas & Betts Corp., Case No. 4:16-cv-00070-DCN
...complaint which is challenged for failure to state a claim under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 12(b)(6)." Doe v. Nevada, 356 F. Supp. 2d 1123, 1125 (D. Nev. 2004).Page 8 "A Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal may be based on either a 'lack of a cognizable legal theory' or 'the absence of s......
-
Leftenant v. Blackmon, Case No. 2:18-cv-01948-EJY
...can be proven "under the amendment to the pleadings that would constitute a valid and sufficient claim or defense." Doe v. Nevada, 356 F. Supp. 2d 1123, 1125 (D. Nev. 2004) (citation omitted). The Court does not discuss futility because Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint goes beyond the C......
-
Velazquez v. Midland Funding, LLC, Case No. 1:18-cv-00043-CWD
...complaint which is challenged for failure to state a claim under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 12(b)(6)." Doe v. Nevada, 356 F. Supp. 2d 1123, 1125 (D. Nev. 2004). "A Rule 12(b)(6)Page 12 dismissal may be based on either a 'lack of a cognizable legal theory' or 'the absence of ......
-
Watts v. Starbucks Corp., Case No. 2:17-cv-00272-DCN
...Valley Solar LLC v. Thomas & Betts Corp., No. 4:16-cv-00070-DCN, 2017 WL 5613009 (D. Idaho Nov. 21, 2017) (quoting Doe v. Nevada, 356 F. Supp. 2d 1123, 1125 (D. Nev. 2004)).IV. ANALYSISA. Motion to Dismiss Starbuck's Motion to Dismiss is easily resolved as the parties largely agree. First, ......
-
Arbon Valley Solar LLC v. Thomas & Betts Corp., Case No. 4:16-cv-00070-DCN
...complaint which is challenged for failure to state a claim under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 12(b)(6)." Doe v. Nevada, 356 F. Supp. 2d 1123, 1125 (D. Nev. 2004).Page 8 "A Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal may be based on either a 'lack of a cognizable legal theory' or 'the absence of s......
-
Leftenant v. Blackmon, Case No. 2:18-cv-01948-EJY
...can be proven "under the amendment to the pleadings that would constitute a valid and sufficient claim or defense." Doe v. Nevada, 356 F. Supp. 2d 1123, 1125 (D. Nev. 2004) (citation omitted). The Court does not discuss futility because Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint goes beyond the C......