Haynes v. Navy Federal Credit Union
282 F.R.D. 17
D.D.C.2012Background
- Haynes sues NFCU over a home mortgage and related issues.
- Haynes moved to amend his complaint to add a “PER SE IRS CODE VIOLATIONS” claim based on Form 1098 and IRC provisions.
- NFCU moved to dismiss; the court previously dismissed the IRC-based claims.
- Court analyzes Rule 15(a)(2) leave to amend and Local Civil Rule 7(m) compliance.
- Haynes’ motion seeks to resurrect a previously dismissed theory and parties did not certify Rule 7(m) compliance.
- Court DENIES the Motion to Amend for futility and procedural grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Should leave to amend be granted? | Haynes seeks to test merits on the new claim. | amendment is improper and futile since the claim was previously dismissed. | Denied; amendment futile and improper. |
| Did Haynes fail to comply with Local Rule 7(m) regarding non-dispositive motions? | not stated; pro se with good faith intent. | Rule 7(m) certification required and absent. | Denied on grounds of non-compliance with Rule 7(m). |
| Is the amendment to resurrect a previously dismissed IRC-based claim appropriate? | claims of IRC violations should proceed on merits. | court already dismissed those claims; cannot resurrect. | Denied; resuscitation of previously dismissed claim rejected. |
Key Cases Cited
- Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178 (1962) (leave to amend freely given unless futile)
- Krantz v. Prudential Invs. Fund Mgmt. LLC, 305 F.3d 140 (3d Cir. 2002) (district court may deny leave to amend where deficiencies were known)
- Henderson v. Frank, 293 F. App’x 410 (7th Cir. 2008) (denial appropriate when plaintiff resurrects previously dismissed claims)
- Ca. Pub. Emps.’ Ret. Sys. v. Chubb Corp., 394 F.3d 126 (3d Cir. 2004) (opportunity to rectify deficiencies is at plaintiff's peril after dispositive motion)
- Wopsock v. Natchees, 279 F. App’x 679 (10th Cir. 2008) (district court may deny leave to amend after briefing on dismissal)