Shen Engineers v. Brighton
This text of Shen Engineers v. Brighton (Shen Engineers v. Brighton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Utah primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
SHEN ENGINEERS, INC., a Utah MEMORANDUM DECISION AND Corporation, ORDER Plaintiff, Case No. 2:22-cv-00624 HCN DBP Vv. District Judge Howard C. Nielson, Jr RICHARD BRIGHTON, an individual, d/b/a BRIGHTON ARCHITECTURAL GROUP, Chief Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead Defendant.
Plaintiff Shen Engineers, Inc. moves the court for leave to file a Second Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 18.)' The motion is timely, it was filed on the last day to file for amended pleadings, and there has been no opposition filed. Leave to amend is to be freely granted. See Foman vy. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 83 S.Ct. 227, 9 L.Ed.2d 222 (1962); Aalco Construction Co. v. F. Linneman Construction Co., 399 F.2d 516 (10th Cir. 1968); Food Basket, Inc. v. Albertsons, 383 F.2d 785 (10th Cir. 1967). And the court finds no reason to deny Plaintiffs motion. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED.
DATED this 8 May 2023.
Dustf-B- Pyad United Stafes Mapistrate Judge
' The case is referred from Judge Howard Nielson for consideration of all nondispositive pretrial matters under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). (ECF No. 14.)
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Shen Engineers v. Brighton, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shen-engineers-v-brighton-utd-2023.