Cited by

Under Arizona Rule of Civil Procedure 15, a court must grant leave to amend unless the “unless the court finds undue delay in the request, bad faith, undue prejudice, or futility in the amendment.”

Generally, denying leave to amend is an abuse of discretion when a party “merely seeks to add a new legal theory.”

Though “[l]eave to amend is discretionary,” a proposed amendment “will be permitted unless the court finds undue delay in the request, bad faith, undue prejudice, or futility in the amendment.”

And even if the two claims were inconsistent, Arizona’s rules of pleading allow plaintiffs to “plead [claims] alternatively and inconsistently.”

P. 15(a)(2), denial of leave to amend is proper if “the court finds undue delay in the request, bad faith, undue prejudice, or futility in the amendment,”

Leave to amend should be liberally granted, Ariz. R. Civ.

A motion to amend can be denied when “the court finds undue delay in the request, bad faith, undue prejudice, or futility in the amendment.” (citation omitted).

An amendment should be permitted “unless the court finds undue delay in the request, bad faith, undue prejudice, or futility in the amendment.”

Although leave to amend is liberally granted, it may be denied if the amendment would be futile, ELM Ret.

Leave to amend should be liberally granted, but is properly denied in cases of undue delay, bad faith, dilatory motive, repeated failure to cure deficiencies by previous amendments, or undue prejudice to the opposing party.