Opinion
01 Civ. 10881 (JSM)(RLE)
June 12, 2002
MEMORANDUM OPNION ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
Before this Court is a Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint by plaintiff Pushpa Topo ("Topo"). For the following reasons, the motion is GRANTED.
II. BACKGROUND
On December 4, 2001, Topo filed a complaint against her employers Nisha Dhir and Ashwin Dhir (collectively, "the defendants") alleging violations of federal and state minimum wage and overtime laws and numerous torts including conversion, breach of contract, fraud, unjust enrichment, quantum meruit, false imprisonment, and wrongful discharge. Topo worked for the defendants as a live-in domestic worker. Plaintiffs Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint, dated May 6, 2002 (Pl. Mem.") at 1. On January 3, 2002, Topo filed an amended complaint, adding a claim of retaliation under the Fair Labor Standards Act based on events that transpired after the filing of her complaint. Declaration of Ranjana Nataraj an, dated May 6, 2002, at ¶ 4. Topo now seeks leave to further amend her complaint to add claims against the defendants for trafficking and involuntary servitude under the Alien Tort Claims Act ("ATCA"). Defendants do not object to the proposed amendment.
III. DISCUSSION
A motion to amend is governed by Rule 15(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which states that "leave [to amend] shall be freely given when justice so requires." Fed.R.Civ.P.15(a); Ronzani v. Sanofi S.A., 899 F.2d 195,198 (2d Cir. 1990). Whether to grant leave to amend is left to the discretion of the district court. Krumme v. WestPoint Stevens, Inc., 143 F.3d 71,88 (2d Cir. 1998). In discussing the proper use of this discretion, the Supreme Court has stated:
In the absence of any apparent or declared reason — such as undue delay, bad faith or dilatory motive on the part of the movant, repeated failure to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed, undue prejudice to the opposing party by virtue of allowance of the amendment, futility of amendment, etc. — the leave sought should, as the rule requires, be "freely given."Fomanv. Davis, 371 U.S. 178,182 (1962).
Topo's proposed amended complaint contains virtually identical facts as the ones in the original complaint. Pl. Mem. at 7. Thus, defendants will not suffer undue prejudice as they continue to obtain discovery on all of her claims. Further, Topo has pled sufficient facts to add a claim under the ATCA. Thus, in the absence of evidence of undue prejudice to the defendants and bad faith on the part of Topo, she should be permitted to amend her complaint.
IV. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Topo's request for leave to amend is hereby GRANTED.