## Facts

- Dennis Stewart worked for Shelby Tissue, Inc., a subsidiary of General Electric Capital Corp., under an employment contract containing a non-competition clause.
- Stewart resigned on January 8, 1999 and filed suit against Shelby and GE the same day.
- After leaving Shelby, Stewart obtained employment with Kruger, Inc. and Global Tissue, LLC.
- On January 22, 1999, Shelby/GE sent letters to Kruger (and to Stewart) asserting Stewart’s new employment violated the non-compete clause.
- In March 1999, Kruger terminated Stewart after receiving the non-compete letters.
- On April 26, 1999, Stewart filed a pleading labeled an “amended complaint” adding claims for unlawful inducement of breach of contract and tortious interference with contractual relations based on the January 22 letters and the subsequent termination.
- At that time, defendants had not filed an answer; Stewart later moved on May 6, 1999 for leave to add the new counts, and defendants opposed.

## Issues

1. Whether claims based on events occurring after the original complaint was filed must be asserted through a supplemental pleading under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(d), rather than an amended pleading under Rule 15(a).
2. Whether leave should be granted to add the post-complaint claims where defendants object and argue prejudice.

## Decision

- The court granted Stewart’s motion to add the new counts.
- The court treated the proposed filing as a supplemental pleading under Rule 15(d) because the new claims arose after the original complaint.
- The court found no undue prejudice to defendants, given the early stage of the case and the relationship of the new claims to the existing dispute.

## Legal Principles

- Rule 15(d) governs pleadings that add claims based on “transactions, occurrences, or events” happening after the pleading to be supplemented.
- Rule 15(a) amendments ordinarily address matters existing before the original pleading and correct or expand earlier allegations.
- Leave to amend or supplement is generally granted under Rule 15’s liberal policy and may be denied for undue prejudice, undue delay, bad faith, futility, or repeated failure to cure deficiencies.
- Courts may treat a mislabeled “amended” pleading as a Rule 15(d) supplemental pleading when the substance of the allegations concerns post-complaint events.

## Conclusion

The court permitted Stewart to add later-arising tort claims tied to defendants’ post-filing non-compete letters by construing the requested filing as a Rule 15(d) supplemental pleading, concluding that supplementation served merits-based resolution and did not unduly prejudice defendants.


Stewart v. Shelby Tissue, Inc., 189 F.R.D. 357 (W.D. Tenn. 1999)