United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Monroe Division
MELBA BINNS, ET AL.
THE TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY OF CONNECTICUT, ET AL.
ROBERT G. JAMES, District Judge.
On February 6, 2015, Magistrate Judge James D. Kirk issued a Memorandum Ruling [Doc. No. 28] denying Plaintiffs' "Motion for Leave of Court to File First Amended, Supplemental and Restated Complaint and to Add Additional Parties in Accordance with the Court's Scheduling Order and Which Gives Rise to 28 USC § 1447(e) Issues to the Court" ("Motion to Amend Complaint") [Doc. No. 17].
Pending before the Court is "Plaintiffs' Written Statement of Appeal and Objection to Magistrate Judge's Memorandum Ruling" ("Appeal") [Doc. No. 30], which the Court considers to be an appeal in accordance with FED. R. CIV. P. 72(a) and L.R. 74.1W. On March 12, 2015, Defendants filed an Opposition [Doc. No. 36].
Motions to amend are non-dispositive pre-trial matters. Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) and Rule 72(a), the Court reviews a magistrate judge's rulings on non-dispositive matters only to determine whether they are clearly erroneous or contrary to law.
Having conducted a thorough review of the entire record, the Court finds that, under the facts and circumstances of this case, the Magistrate Judge's order was not clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. Specifically, the Court finds that Magistrate Judge Kirk's determinations of law were not clear error when he denied Plaintiffs' Motion to Amend Complaint. Therefore, Plaintiffs' ...