In Indianapolis Life Insurance Company v. Hentz, the court, in relevant part, agreed that the insured’s proposed amended complaint, as written, would resurrect previously dismissed claims, including one for bad faith. This would put it in violation of Local Rule 15.1 that requires a complaint to be complete in itself. Based upon the actual motion to amend, however, it was not the insured’s intent to resurrect these claims. The court determined that violating this local rule was insufficient reason to deny the motion entirely so it denied the motion to amend only on the previously dismissed claims and their respective allegations that were inadvertently left in the complaint.
Date of Decision: Jan. 6, 2009
Indianapolis Life Ins. Co. v. Hentz, CIVIL ACTION No. 1:06-CV-2152, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 618 (M.D. Pa. Jan. 6, 2009)(Kane, C.J.)