Attorney Keith Clouse is a nationally recognized employment law attorney. This website and all materials on it have been prepared by Clouse Dunn LLP for informational purposes only. These materials do not, and are not intended to, constitute legal advice.
The court examined whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying motions to continue the case and to allow a party to amend his complaint.
April 12, 2015
(press release: cdklawyers) // Dallas, Texas, United States // Keith Clouse The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled in an employment matter. Squyres v. Heico Cos., L.L.C., No. 13-11358 (Apr. 2, 2015), available at http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/13/13-11358-CV0.pdf. As part of its ruling, the court examined whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying motions to continue the case and to allow a party the opportunity to amend his complaint.
The court concluded that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motions for continuances. The party seeking a continuance must show that good cause for it exists. Here, the moving party failed to do so because the parties’ “self-imposed” agreement to delay discovery until after dispositive orders were entered did not explain why the party waited five months after those orders were entered to schedule depositions. The trial court also properly denied the party’s request to amend his complaint because he failed to show good cause for his delay. Although the party claimed that he did not have the basis to allege a new claim until after a particular deposition, he acknowledged before the court almost a year earlier that he might amend his complaint to include this new claim. In addition, the party failed to demonstrate that the amendment would have caused no prejudice to the other party.
This article is presented by the Dallas employment attorneys at Clouse Dunn LLP. To speak to an employment law attorney, send an email to firstname.lastname@example.org or call (214) 239-2705.