Motion for Leave to Amend in Indiana

Understanding the Purpose and Significance of a Motion for Leave to Amend

“Trial Rule 15(A) provides that a party may amend its pleading by leave of court, and leave shall be given when justice so requires.” (See United of Omaha v. Hieber (1995) 653 N.E.2d 83, 87.)

“Amendments should be liberally allowed under Trial Rule 15(A), while giving proper regard for any prejudice to the nonmoving party.” (See Templin v. Fobes (1993) 617 N.E.2d 541, 543.)

“The stated policy of this court and the Supreme [1] Court of Indiana is to freely allow such amendments in order to bring all matters at issue before the court.” (See State Farm v. Shuman (1977) 175 Ind. App. 186, 192-93.)

Factors used to Determine a Motion for Leave to Amend

“In Palacios v. Kline (1991) Ind. App., 566 N.E.2d 573, this court articulated several factors to which a trial court should look in determining whether justice requires the leave be granted.” (See General Motors Corp. v. Northrop Corp. (1997) 685 N.E.2d 127, 142.)

“Among the factors which a trial court may consider are undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of the movant, repeated failure to cure deficiencies by previous amendments, undue prejudice to the opposing party and futility of amendment.” (See United of Omaha v. Hieber (1995) 653 N.E.2d 83, 87.)

Discretion of the Court in Deciding a Motion for Leave to Amend

“The trial court has broad discretion in deciding whether to permit amendments to pleadings, and we will reverse only upon a showing of abuse of that discretion.” (See Lilge v. Russell's Trailer Repair, Inc. (1991), Ind. App., 565 N.E.2d 1146, 1151.)

“An abuse of discretion is an erroneous conclusion and judgment, clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before the court or the reasonable deductions to be drawn therefrom.” (See General Motors Corp. v. Northrop Corp. (1997) 685 N.E.2d 127, 142.)

“The trial court considers whether undue delay, bad faith, or dilatory motive exists on the part of the movant, and whether the nonmovant will be unduly prejudiced by the amendment.” (See Hudson v. McClaskey (1992) 583 N.E.2d 1228, 1231.)

“Unless prejudice is shown, it will be presumed there was no error.” (See State Farm v. Shuman (1977) 175 Ind. App. 186, 193.)

Legal Precedents and Case Law on a Motion for Leave to Amend

It is well settled that “amendments to the pleadings are to be liberally allowed in order that all issues involved in a lawsuit are presented to the jury." (See General Motors Corp. v. Northrop Corp. (1997) 685 N.E.2d 127, 142.)

It is also well settled that “Indiana Trial Rule 15(A) provides for one amendment as a matter of right in certain circumstances and otherwise allows a complaint to be amended by leave of the trial court, and leave shall be given when justice so requires." (See U.S. Bank Tr. Nat'l Ass'n v. Modesitt, Court of Appeals No. 61A01-1612-MF-2897, at *5 (Ind. App. June 26, 2017).)