The opinion of the court was delivered by: (judge Caputo)
Presently before the Court is the plaintiff's motion seeking leave to file an amended complaint. (Doc. No. 35.) For the reasons explained below, the motion will be denied.
A. Factual Background*fn1
The plaintiff in this action is Maud Rios, who lives in New York. Ms. Rios brought this action against Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America and its agent, Mario Cabrera. Allianz is a Minnesota corporation and Mr. Cabrera resides in Pennsylvania.
In the spring of 2006, Mr. Cabrera approached Ms. Rios and suggested she obtain a home equity loan and use those funds to purchase an annuity policy with Allianz. Ms. Rios did so, and Mr. Cabrera was the Allianz agent responsible for the account. Mr. Cabrera promised Ms. Rios a higher return if she would borrow $40,000 from the annuity and loan him that sum. She obtained the loan, and Allianz mailed her a check for $40,000.
Ms. Rios notified Mr. Cabrera that the check had arrived, and he traveled to her home in New York. Ms. Rios refused to endorse the check, but Mr. Cabrera told her he would take care of it and left with the check. He allegedly forged Ms. Rios's signature on the check, cashed it, and took the $40,000 for his own use.
After this, Mr. Cabrera asked Ms. Rios for an additional loan of $42,000 which he planned to use for refinancing his property. Ms. Rios agreed to loan him this amount based on the proposed rate of return. Mr. Cabrera made several payments on the loan between January 2007 and May 2008, but refused to make any further payments. After repeated telephone requests by Ms. Rios, Mr. Cabrera memorialized the amounts owed and payments scheduled in a signed document.
Ms. Rios initially brought this action in the Monroe County Court of Common Pleas. After removing the action to federal court, Allianz moved to dismiss Counts II, III, and IV of the complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted. The Court granted Allianz's motion and directed Ms. Rios to file an amended complaint. Ms. Rios moves for leave to amend her complaint, and Allianz opposes the motion.
The proposed amended complaint contains four counts. In Count I, which is identical to Count I of the original complaint (which has not been dismissed), Ms. Rios brings a breach of contract claim against Mr. Cabrera. In Count II, Ms. Rios brings a claim for deceptive trade practices against both defendants under the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law. In Count III, she brings a claim against Allianz for fraud, and in Count IV she brings a claim against Allianz for allegedly violating its fiduciary relationship with her.
The court may deny leave to amend where amendment would be futile. See In re Burlington Coat Factory Sec. Litig., 114 ...