Case law · Highest court · Federal

Foman v. Davis

Decided
December 3, 1962
Docket
41
Status
Published
Jurisdiction
Federal

Cited 17,205 timesNo negative treatment found in this library

What later courts said

  • holding that "undue prejudice to the opposing party," among other reasons, is a ground to deny leave to amend — Soules v. Connecticut (2018)
  • holding that leave to amend must be "freely given" in the absence of undue delay, bad faith, dilatory motive, or futility — Bauchman v. West High School (1997)
  • holding that leave to amend should generally be freely given, unless the plaintiff "repeated[ly] fail[s] to cure deficiencies by amendments previously allowed" — America West Bank Members L.C. v. State (2014)

Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.

How the opinion begins

Mr. Justice Goldberg delivered the opinion of the Court.

Petitioner filed a complaint in the District Court alleging that, in exchange for petitioner’s promise to care for and support her mother, petitioner’s father had agreed not to make a will, thereby assuring petitioner of an intestate share of the father’s estate; it was further alleged that petitioner had fully performed her obligations under the oral agreement, but that contrary thereto the father had devised his property to respondent, his second wife and executrix. Petitioner sought recovery of what would have been her intestate share of the father’s estate. Respondent moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the oral agreement was unenforceable under the applicable state statute of frauds. Accepting respondent’s contention, the District Court entered judgment on December 19, 1960, dismissing petitioner’s complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief might be granted. On December 20, 1960, petitioner filed motions to vacate the judgment and to amend the complaint to assert a right of recovery in quantum meruit for performance of the obligations which were the consideration for the assertedly unenforceable oral contract. On January 17, 1961, petitioner filed a notice of appeal from the judgment of December 19, 1960. On January 23, 1961, the District Court denied petitioner’s motions to vacate the judgment and to amend the complaint. On January 26, 1961, petitioner filed a notice of appeal from denial of the motions.

On appeal, the parties briefed and argued the merits of dismissal of the complaint and denial of petitioner’s [*180] motions by the District Court. Notwithstanding, the Court of Appeals of its own accord dismissed the appeal insofar as taken from the District Court judgment of December 19, 1960, and affirmed the orders of the District Court entered January 23, 1961. 292 F. 2d 85. This Court granted certiorari. 368 U. S. 951.

Cite this

Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178 (1962)

Read the full opinion

Free account needed

Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.