Where a plaintiff has moved to amend her first amended complaint, that motion should be allowed.
“On August 6, 2026, the plaintiff sought permission to file a second amended complaint. …
“In the case at bar, the court finds nothing on the record establishing bad faith on the part of the plaintiff in bringing this motion. …
“As it does not appear that granting this motion will prevent the defendants from receiving a fair trial, as there is no record of important witnesses dying or that necessary evidence has been destroyed or lost. The defendants will not be prejudiced should the court grant this motion. …
“Count XI of the proposed second amended complaint, entitled ‘Unfair Competition,’ is a slightly rounded peg forced into a square hole. But the court cannot say that it is a futile claim. …
“Finally, the defendants assert that Shawn Smith enjoys absolute immunity arising out of tluee things he allegedly did: (1) seeking a personal protection order (‘PPO’) in the Kent County Circuit Court; (2) filing a complaint against Lunar Cycle’s owner with the Attorney Grievance Commission; and (3) reporting a crime to the Kent County Sheriff Department. …
“The court concludes that MCR 9.125, as applied to the facts set forth in the proposed second amended complaint, provides Shawn Smith absolute immunity for his statements made to the grievance commission. The plaintiff may not rely on those statements to establish a tort. …
“The proposed Second Amended Complaint is 150 pages with 734 separately numbered paragraphs. It is obviously lengthier and more detailed than what is required by MCR 2.111. Some might describe it as a ‘talking complaint.’ …
“That the proposed second amended complaint contains redundancies is obvious at first glance. …
“Plaintiff’s motion to amend her first amended complaint is, in principle, granted. …
“Plaintiff will redraft the proposed complaint. In redrafting the complaint, the plaintiff will strike from the complaint all paragraphs that exceed what is necessary or normal. The plaintiff will strike from the complaint all paragraphs that use more words than necessary. The plaintiff will strike from the complaint all repetitive paragraphs. The plaintiff will strike from the complaint all the pictures, and advertising, that, again, though likely admissible in trial, are not necessary to support plaintiff’s claims.”
Lunar Cycle, LLC v. Smith; MiLW No. 10-111241, 8 pages; Kent Circuit Court; Benson, J.