The opinion
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
NATHAN ERWIN, individually, and
NATHAN ERWIN, as ADMINISTRATOR | Case No. 22cv1794 (EP) (JBC)
AD PROSEQUENDUM OF THE ESTATE
OF TERRANCE ERWIN, deceased, MEMORANDUM ORDER
Plaintiffs,
Vv.
DENNIS BROWN, ABC COMPANY 1-
10 (said name being fictitious and
unknown), JOHN DOES 1-10 (said names
being fictitious and unknown),
Defendants.
PADIN, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court by way of Plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the
complaint pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a) to join a party, Rafael A. Ayala, as a defendant, and
to remand this case to the Superior Court of New Jersey, County of Middlesex, D.E. 13.
Defendants did not file a brief in opposition. Thus, the Court considers Plaintiff's motion
unopposed.
Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a), leave to amend is generally granted liberally. See Foman □□□
Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182 (1962); Alvin v. Suzuki, 227 F.3d 107, 121 (3d Cir. 2000). Therefore,
in the absence of undue prejudice, unfair prejudice, futility, motions to amend are granted. See
Arthur v. Maersk, Inc., 434 F.3d 196, 204 (3d Cir. 2006); Otsuka Pharm. Co., LTD. v. Torrent
Pharms. Ltd., Inc., 99 F. Supp. 3d 461, 472-73 (D.N.J. 2015). Here, Plaintiff asserts that its
proposal to join Rafael A. Ayala as a defendant is based on recently acquired information that he
was directly involved in the accident that resulted in the death of Terrance Erwin, the decedent.
D.E. 13 at 8. By virtue of failing to oppose Plaintiffs motion, Defendants have not raised any
reasons why equitable considerations would render granting the motion unjust.
But this case is before this Court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction, D.E. 1. Thus, with
the joinder of Rafael A. Ayala, a New Jersey resident, as a defendant, diversity jurisdiction
would no longer exist. Where the joinder of a non-diverse party requires remand of a case, the
Court must give careful consideration in whether to grant the amendment.
To determine whether joinder of a non-diverse party should be permitted, Courts in this
Circuit regularly apply the factors set forth by the Fifth Circuit in Hensgens v. Deere Co., 833
F.2d 1179, 1182 (Sth Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 851 (1989). See, e.g., Midthassel v.
Aramark Corp., 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59324 (D.N.J. June 15, 2010). The Hensgens factors
are: (1) the extent to which the purpose of the amendment is to defeat federal jurisdiction; (2)
whether the plaintiff has been dilatory in asking for amendment; (3) whether the plaintiff will be
significantly injured if amendment is not allowed; and (4) any other factors bearing on the
equities. See Hensgens, 833 F.2d at 1182.
The Court now considers the Hensgens factors with respect to Plaintiff's motion. The
first Hensgens factor is whether the purpose of the amendment is to defeat federal jurisdiction, or
if Plaintiff has legitimate reasons for the amendment. Jordan v. AlliedBarton Sec. Servs., 2010
U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119408, at *9 (D.N.J. Nov. 9, 2010). “Generally, if a proposed claim is viable,
and there is genuine intent to prosecute the claim in good faith, the primary purpose of joinder is
not to defeat federal jurisdiction.” City of Perth Amboy v. Saveco Ins. Co., 539 F. Supp. 2d 742,
754 (D.N.J. 2008).
Here, Plaintiff asserts that he has a legitimate reason for adding a non-diverse defendant:
comprehensively and efficiently litigating his claims in a single forum. D.E. 13 at 12. Because
the claims against Rafael A. Ayala arise out of and are based on the same set of facts and
circumstances as those relevant to Defendant, it is plausible that the two individuals may
eventually be found jointly and severally liable. See Bayonne Med. Realty, LLC v. Citizens Ins.
Co. of America, 2008 WL 2945970 (D.N.J. July 30, 2008) (finding plaintiff's primary intent in
adding non-diverse parties was efficiency in litigating its claims and not destroying diversity).
Thus, the Court finds Plaintiff has a legitimate reason for seeking to add a non-diverse defendant.
The second Hensgens factor is whether Plaintiff has been dilatory in asking for
amendment. Jordan, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119408, at *10-11. Plaintiff asserts that he was
unaware at the time of the accident that Rafael A. Ayala had struck the decedent in the course of
the accident, but that Plaintiff preserved his right to name Ayala by naming John Doe
defendants, and that with additional information Plaintiff has now ascertained that Ayala should
be named as a defendant. D.E. 13 at 17. Additionally, discovery is not yet complete. The Court
does not find that Plaintiff has been dilatory.
The third Hensgens factor is whether Plaintiff will be significantly injured if amendment
is not permitted. Jordan, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119408, at *12-13. Plaintiff asserts that he
would be economically prejudiced if amendment is not permitted because he will be required to
litigate two forums for complete relief. D-E. 17. In Bayonne Med. Realty, LLC, the court found
that maintaining two separate actions involving intersecting facts, documents, and issues in two
different forums imposes an economic burden on a plaintiff. 2008 WL 295470, at *4. Here,
Plaintiff also asserts that he would be legally prejudiced if amendment is not permitted because
there is a genuine risk of inconsistent ruling and findings if he is required to litigate in two
forums. D.E. 18. In Perth Amboy, the court found that where joint and several liability exists
between a proposed defendant and another defendant, then there is a genuine risk of conflicting
findings and rulings if the proposed defendant is not joined. 539 F. Supp. 2d at 749. The Court
agrees that this factor weighs in favor of Plaintiff for the reasons he asserts.
The fourth Hensgens factor requires the Court to consider whether any other factors exist
that have a bearing on the equities. Jones, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119408, at *13-14. Plaintiff
asserts that judicial economy and efficiency weight in favor of Plaintiff. D-E. 13 at 18. The
Court agrees because if this case is remanded to state court, Plaintiff may seek relief in one
single forum.
Having considered the Hensgens factors and finding that they weigh in favor of
permitting joinder of Rafael A. Ayala, a New Jersey resident, the Court will permit his joinder
and remand this case to state court.
IT IS on this 28th day of October, 2022;
ORDERED that Plaintiffs motion for leave to amend the complaint, D.E. 13, is GRANTED;
and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to remand this case to the Superior Court of New Jersey,
County of Middlesex, D.E. 13, is GRANTED; and it is finally
ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall terminate the pending motion for leave to amend and
remand, D.E. 13, and CLOSE this case upon remand to the Superior Court of New Jersey,
County of Middlesex.
Sola Tobe
Dated: October 28, 2022
Hon. Evelyn Padin, U.S.D.J.