01-1651, 01-1771 Campania Management Co. v. Rooks, Pitts & Poust

By: dmc-admin//May 20, 2002//

Listen to this article

“Campania’s agency defense would have complicated this straightforward breach of contract dispute by raising additional, complex issues merely six days prior to the discovery deadline that was agreed upon by both parties. Because Campania admitted in its original answer that it retained Rooks, Rooks could not have foreseen the possibility of litigating whether CGI was legally responsible for paying Rooks’s bills. The parties had conducted no discovery on this subject, and discovery would have delayed this matter for several months, for at least three potential witnesses were no longer employed by CGI or Campania by the time the motion was filed. We are convinced that the trial judge was acting within her discretion when she denied Campania’s motion to amend its answer and further barred Campania from introducing any evidence to support this defense.”

Affirmed.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Conlon, J., Coffey, J.

Select Region or Brand

Upcoming Event