1:24-cv-01111
E.D. Cal.Apr 15, 2025Background
- Andrew Verhines, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, challenges California’s primary candidate filing fee structure as unconstitutional.
- Allegations center around the First and Fourteenth Amendments regarding candidate access to the ballot for U.S. House primaries.
- Plaintiff seeks to amend his complaint to include data on the high failure rate (99.8%) of signature-based ballot access compared to fee payment.
- The motion for leave to amend is unopposed by Defendant Shirley N. Weber.
- The case is in its early stages, and the proposed amendment is the first such request by Plaintiff.
- The Court conditionally grants leave to amend, requiring Plaintiff to verify his amended complaint under penalty of perjury within 14 days.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Leave to amend complaint | Amendment is necessary to refine and strengthen claims | No timely opposition | Leave to amend granted |
| Adequacy of signature-gathering as alternate ballot access | 99.8% failure rate makes it illusory | Not provided | Amendment may proceed |
| Bad faith, undue delay, or prejudice | No such factors present | No arguments made | No reason to deny amendment |
| Requirement for verified complaint | Will follow required verification | Not addressed | Verification required |
Key Cases Cited
- Swanson v. United States Forest Service, 87 F.3d 339 (9th Cir. 1996) (court has discretion regarding leave to amend pleadings)
- United States v. Webb, 655 F.2d 977 (9th Cir. 1981) (leave to amend should be granted with extreme liberality)
- Desertrain v. City of L.A., 754 F.3d 1147 (9th Cir. 2014) (five-factor test for leave to amend: bad faith, delay, prejudice, futility, prior amendments)