Issue: What is the standard for deciding a motion to amend a complaint in the Third Circuit?
| Area of Law: | Litigation & Procedure |
| Keywords: | Motion to amend a complaint; Standard for deciding; Intentional infliction of emotional distress tort |
| Jurisdiction: | Federal |
| Cited Cases: | 42 F. Supp. 2d 547 |
| Cited Statutes: | Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46; Restatement (Second) § 46; Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 26 |
| Date: | 07/01/2001 |
Restatement (Second) of Torts § 46 indicates that the tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress is found where “one who by extreme and outrageous conduct intentionally or recklessly causes severe emotional distress to another.” See Seafarers Int’l Union of N. Am. v. Thomas, 42 F. Supp. 2d 547 (D.V.I. 1999) (under Restatement (Second) § 46 recognizing claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress).
Courts have indicated that where a dismissal is without prejudice, res judicata does not apply. Venuto v. Witco Corp., 117 F.3d 754 (3d Cir. 1997) (citing Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 26 (1982)).
[…]