§15.5 Purpose and Procedure
Jurisdiction | Washington |
§15.5 PURPOSE AND PROCEDURE
The purposes of CR 15 are to "facilitate a proper decision on the merits," Caruso v. Local Union 690 of Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, 100 Wn.2d 343, 349, 670 P.2d 240 (1983), and to "provide each party with adequate notice of the basis of the claims or defenses asserted against him," Herron v. Tribune Publ'g Co., 108 Wn.2d 162, 165, 736 P.2d 249 (1987) (citing Pierce Cnty. Sheriff v. Civil Serv. Comm'n, 98 Wn.2d 690, 695, 658 P.2d 648 (1983)). The rule was designed in part to avoid "the tyranny of formalism" that characterized former practice. Reichelt v. Johns-Manville Corp., 107 Wn.2d 761, 766, 733 P.2d 530 (1987). An underlying purpose of the rule is to avoid a multiplying of lawsuits. O'Kelley v. Sali, 67 Wn.2d 296, 407P.2d467 (1965).
(1)Distinction between amended and supplemental pleadings
Strictly speaking, an amended pleading adds to or changes its predecessor pleading on file to include matters that existed at the time of the original pleading but were either unknown or overlooked. By contrast, a supplemental pleading updates a pleading to include facts and events that occurred after the filing of the original pleading. Herron, 108 Wn.2d at 168. The major procedural difference between amendment and supplementation is that the latter always requires leave of court. Compare CR 15(a) with CR 15(d). The court will likely apply the same considerations in deciding whether to permit amendment and supplementation. See 6A Charles A. Wright, Arthur R. Miller & Mary K. Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure §1504 (3d ed. 2010 & Supp. 2013). To mischaracterize a motion to alter a pleading as a motion to "supplement," rather than to "amend," or vice versa, generally should not affect the motion's disposition. Herron, 108 Wn.2d at 168 (citing Wright & Miller).
(2) Pleadings that may be amended or supplemented
CR 15 makes repeated reference to amending or supplementing a "pleading." That term is defined by CR 7(a), which lists the pleadings allowed under Washington practice as a complaint, an answer, a reply to a counterclaim, an answer to a cross claim, a third-party complaint, and a third-party answer. In addition, the court may order a reply to an answer or a third-party answer. In the words of CR 7(a), "[n]o other pleading shall be allowed ...."
CR 7(b) contains provisions relating to "motions and other papers," as distinguished from "pleadings." This suggests that a motion or other paper filed in the lawsuit is not subj ect to amendment or supplementation under CR 15. Although this issue has not been expressly addressed by Washington courts, this premise follows logically from those authorities that have concluded that the filing of a motion, such as a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment, does not constitute the filing of a "responsive pleading" that would cut off a party's ability to amend as a matter of course under CR 15(a). See 3AKarl B. Tegland, Washington Practice: Rules Practice, CR 15 (6th ed. 2013) (and federal cases cited therein); 6 Charles A. Wright, Arthur R. Miller & Mary K. Kane, Federal Practice and Procedure §§1475, 1483 (3d ed. 2010 & Supp. 2013).
If parties are added or deleted, the caption should so reflect. The case number assigned when the original complaint was filed is preserved. The nature of the pleading being amended or supplemented should be reflected in the title of the pleading, e.g., "Third-Party Defendant's First Amended Answer and Cross Claim" or "Plaintiff's Supplemental Complaint."
(3) Service of amended or supplemental pleadings
If a motion for leave to file an amended pleading is made, the motion must be...
To continue reading
Request your trial