recognizing district court may properly deny motion to amend where amendment would not withstand a motion to dismiss
Summary of this case from Wallace v. Federated Department StoresNo. 83-386.
October 31, 1983.
C.A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 706 F. 2d 111.
recognizing district court may properly deny motion to amend where amendment would not withstand a motion to dismiss
Summary of this case from Wallace v. Federated Department Storesstating that "the defendants here were not diligent in pursuing this case and therefore would not prevail even if gross negligence qualified as another Rule 60(b) ground for relief"
Summary of this case from Nelson v. City Colleges of Chicagoarising under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)
Summary of this case from Deppe v. TrippFull title:MASSARSKY v. GENERAL MOTORS CORP
Court:U.S.
Date published: Oct 31, 1983
Until recently the Seventh Circuit had refused to take a position on this issue. SeeInryco, Inc. v.…
Selzer v. the Board of Educ. of City of New York(1st Cir.1984), the theory has also been applied in employment discrimination actions based on other…