Also known as: freely gives leave · freely giving leave · freely given leave · grant leave · give leave
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A standard directing courts to permit amendment of pleadings when justice so requires. The standard applies after the period for amendment as of right has expired and requires the court to grant leave absent undue delay, bad faith, futility, or undue prejudice to the opposing party.
SkyCore answered AeroNational's complaint denying liability for a failed aircraft component. After reconciling billing records produced in discovery, SkyCore moved for leave to add a counterclaim for unpaid invoices. The court granted the motion because the new claim arose from the same commercial relationship and AeroNational identified no concrete prejudice from the timing.
Dana sued Briarwood College for sex discrimination in promotion. After depositions revealed she had been excluded from committees following the suit, Dana moved for leave to add a retaliation claim. The court granted the motion because the new claim rested on post-suit events uncovered during discovery and Briarwood showed no undue prejudice.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
The standard applies once the 21-day period after service of a responsive pleading or listed motion has expired. A party must then obtain consent or court leave, and the court applies the justice-so-requires test.
Supporting sources
Courts deny leave only for undue delay, bad faith, dilatory motive, repeated failure to cure deficiencies, undue prejudice, or futility. The burden rests on the opponent to show one of these factors.
Supporting sources
No. Timing alone does not defeat the motion. The court examines whether the delay was undue and whether real prejudice, such as the need to restart discovery, would result.
Supporting sources
Yes. Courts routinely permit addition of related claims or counterclaims when the facts supporting them emerge in discovery and no disqualifying factor appears.
Supporting sources
…We have previously explained that a court may consider a movant’s “undue delay” or “dilatory motive” in deciding whether to grant leave to amend under Rule 15(a). Foman v. Davis , 371 U. S. 178, 182 (1962). As the contrast between Rule 15(a) and Rule 15(c) makes clear, however, the speed with which a plaintiff moves to…