Iqbal v. Ashcroft

United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2009 · Federal Courts

Federal CourtsCivil ProcedurePleadingAmendment of PleadingsRule 15leave to amenddistrict court discretionabuse of discretion

Facts

The Supreme Court had already determined that Javaid Iqbal's complaint did not satisfy Rule 8 because it had not nudged his discrimination claims from conceivable to plausible. On remand, the only question addressed by the Second Circuit was whether the case should be sent back to the district court so that Iqbal could seek leave to amend the deficient complaint. Rule 15(a)(2) provides that a party may amend only with the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave, and that leave should be freely given when justice so requires. The court focused on which court should decide that amendment question in the first instance.

Issue

When the Supreme Court has held a complaint deficient and directed the court of appeals to decide whether to remand so the plaintiff can seek leave to amend, should the court of appeals decide the amendment question itself or remand to the district court to consider leave to amend in the first instance?

Rule

Under Rule 15(a)(2), leave to amend should be freely given when justice so requires. In the ordinary course, the decision whether to grant or deny leave to amend belongs to the district court in the first instance, and appellate review of that decision is deferential for abuse of discretion.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In a civil rights suit filed in federal court in Chicago, Lena Ortiz's complaint was dismissed. The Supreme Court later held the pleading did not satisfy Rule 8 and instructed the court of appeals to decide whether the case should be sent back so Lena could seek leave to amend. The defendants urge the court of appeals to decide amendment itself and end the case.

What is the best course for the court of appeals?

Explanation. Rule 15(a)(2) provides that amendment after the initial pleading stage requires the opposing party's written consent or the court's leave, and leave should be freely given when justice so requires. The ordinary course is for the district court—not the court of appeals—to decide whether leave to amend should be granted in the first instance, with appellate review only for abuse of discretion. (Derived from Iqbal v. Ashcroft (n.d.).)