M
MISSOURIBRUCE
Guest
I am representing myself pro se as the defendant in a petition for declaratory judgment brought against me. The plaintiff (my ex-partner's widow) only asked the court to declare the nature of the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant (Are we partners are not ?), but asked for no monetary consideration.
I filled a motion for summary judgment and the plaintiff in its response admitted to most of the issues of the motion for summary judgment.
But now the plaintiff has asked the court for leave to amend the original petition, and maintains that the defendant's deposition taken by the plaintiff revealed reasonable grounds for bringing additional causes of action against the defendant under theories of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, and negligent misrepresentation arising out of business dealings between the parties. All of these issues are bogus and can easily be defeated.
I would like to use some argument to persuade the court to not allow such amendments at this late date, when I feel I am about to obtain a summary judgment. This proposed new action by the plaintiff, which presumably would seek some monetary reward, seems totally unrelated to the original petition for declaratory judgment, which sought none. What theory could I argue to defeat this request to amend the original petition?
I filled a motion for summary judgment and the plaintiff in its response admitted to most of the issues of the motion for summary judgment.
But now the plaintiff has asked the court for leave to amend the original petition, and maintains that the defendant's deposition taken by the plaintiff revealed reasonable grounds for bringing additional causes of action against the defendant under theories of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, and negligent misrepresentation arising out of business dealings between the parties. All of these issues are bogus and can easily be defeated.
I would like to use some argument to persuade the court to not allow such amendments at this late date, when I feel I am about to obtain a summary judgment. This proposed new action by the plaintiff, which presumably would seek some monetary reward, seems totally unrelated to the original petition for declaratory judgment, which sought none. What theory could I argue to defeat this request to amend the original petition?