Topic: untimeliness in itself can be a sufficient reason to deny l… · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #15015

4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 26 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 70 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 625, 32 fed.r.serv.3d 867 Robin Floyd Panis v. Mission Hills Bank, N.A..

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 70 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 625, 32 fed.r.serv.3d 867 Robin Floyd Panis v. Mission Hills Bank, N.A. Anchor
ca10 · 1995
green “untimeliness in itself can be a sufficient reason to deny leave to amend, particularly when the movant provides no adequate explanation for the delay.” 15
2 Gary D. Patton, Cross-Appellant v. Albert E. Guyer, Martha Frances Guyer, Howard Fisher, D/B/A Fisher's I.G.A., Cross-Appellees
ca10 · 1971
green “courts typically find prejudice only when the amendment unfairly affects the defendants 'in terms of preparing their defense to the amendment.” 5
3 Hayes v. Whitman
ca10 · 2001
green “salvage a lost case by untimely suggestion of new theories of recovery.” 3
4 Tosco Corporation v. Koch Industries
ca10 · 2000
green “no lapse of time can legalize a public nuisance amounting to an actual obstruction of public right.” 3

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.

← Caselaw search · Hot / Trending / Newly red · Brief Check