Laserfiche WebLink
representation of ownership was not complete Plaintiff now believes that Defendants <br />Ray and Brad Barker own an undivided interest in the Property, and that Lisa Barker <br />also owns an undivided interest in the Property. Plaintiff further believes that there are <br />two leasehold interests in the Property, one under a Lease Agreement with First Right <br />of Refusal to Purchase Property held by Glen E. Stinson, a resident of Dallas, Georgia, <br />and one under a Recreational Lease Agreement held by the State of Colorado acting <br />by and through the Department of Natural Resources for the use and benefit of the <br />Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation and Board of Parks and Outdoor Recreation. <br />For a full adjudication of this matter, Plaintiff claims that it is necessary for it to <br />amend its Complaint to add the additional owners of interest in the Property as <br />defendants in this action Plaintiff alerts the court that 'rf the amendment is granted <br />diversity jurisdiction will be destroyed, It claims the court will then need to remand this <br />case to the state district court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(e). <br />11. Analysis. <br />A. Amendment of Complaint. <br />Before the court addresses the issue of remand, it must first determine if Plaintiff <br />should be allowed to amend its complaint. FEO. R. CN. P. 15(a) provides for <br />amendment of pleadings with the court's approval, stating: "[l]eave shall be freely given <br />when justice so requires." FED. R. CN. P. 21 allows the addition Of parties upon <br />approval of the court The Tenth Circuit has stated that amendment should be granted <br />absent apparent reason to refuse. Triplett v. Leflore Oklahoma, 712 F.2d 444 (10'" <br />Cir. 1983). In Triplett, the court stated: °In the absence of an apparent reason to refuse <br />4 <br />