Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 32 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Duncan v. Manager, Department of Safety.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Duncan v. Manager, Department of Safety Anchor | green | “in the tenth circuit, untimeliness alone is an adequate reason to refuse leave to amend.” | 17 |
| 2 | Bradley v. Val-Mejias | green | “freely given when justice so requires.” | 7 |
| 3 | Colorado Visionary Academy v. Medtronic, Inc. | green | “focuses on the diligence of the party seeking leave to modify the scheduling order to permit the proposed amendment.” | 4 |
| 4 | Pumpco, Inc. v. Schenker International, Inc. | green | “if a plaintiff learns new information through discovery or if the underlying law has changed.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.