Katherine Deloach v. Ralph E. Woodley

405 F.2d 496
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 22, 1969
Docket26330_1
StatusPublished
Cited by118 cases

This text of 405 F.2d 496 (Katherine Deloach v. Ralph E. Woodley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Katherine Deloach v. Ralph E. Woodley, 405 F.2d 496 (5th Cir. 1969).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The jurisdictional derivative of this action is 28 U.S.C.A. § 1332 which requires that the matter in controversy exceed the sum or value of $10,000.00 exclusive of interest and costs. We have ferreted the complaint for allegations supporting the jurisdictional amount and could find only the following: “The estimated sum which the plaintiff alleges the defendant owes her for the eleven (11) years support of her daughter, Kathryne, is Seven Thousand Eight Hundred Sixty Dollars ($7,860.00) with interest.” The fatal vulnerability of this allegation is obvious and dismissal was therefore properly decreed. Wood v. Citronelle-Mobile Gathering System Company Ltd., et al., 5 Cir. 1968, 409 F.2d 367 (December 4, 1968).

Appellant complains that a motion was made in the district court to amend her complaint and that leave to amend was denied. However, appellant’s proposed amendment alleged no new jurisdictional facts. As such her amended complaint would have been subject to dismissal for the same reasons as her original complaint. The liberal amend *497 ment rules of F.R.Civ.P. 15(a) do not require that courts indulge in futile gestures. Where a complaint, as amended, would be subject to dismissal, leave to amend need not be granted. Foman v. Davis, 1962, 371 U.S. 178, 88 S.Ct. 227, 9 L.Ed. 222, 226.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

DeBeikes v. Frost Bank
W.D. Texas, 2025
McMillian v. The City of Aberdeen
N.D. Mississippi, 2025
Rux v. Smart
W.D. Texas, 2025
Pierce v. Kobach
Tenth Circuit, 2024

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
405 F.2d 496, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/katherine-deloach-v-ralph-e-woodley-ca5-1969.