Kirsch

This Court by its Memorandum and Order of June 24, 1957 ( 153 F.Supp. 260 ), dismissed plaintiff’s original complaint and the cause of action sought to be set forth therein. Plaintiff has now filed a motion seeking permission to file an amended complaint in this action.

The facts, which the original complaint alleged to exist, are set forth at length in this Court’s earlier Memorandum and Order. The complaint now sought to be filed contains no allegations which materially affect the factual composition as previously set forth. Only the emphasis is shifted. Specifically, the same logging contract, the same parties, the same acts, and the same consequences are involved. Plaintiff’s theory of his case has been more clearly defined, however, and, because of that improvement, both the proposed amended complaint and the theory warrant careful analysis.

Preliminarily, there must be a disposition of certain procedural assertions of plaintiff. First, it is not the law that a party may amend his complaint as a matter of right under Rule 15(a), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., after the Court has entered an order dismissing the original complaint and the cause of action…