Page:Pelman v. McDonald's Corporation (S.D.N.Y. 2003).pdf/32

 and the plaintiffs’ resulting ingestion thereof is a proximate cause of the plaintiff’s health problems. As a result, Count V is dismissed.


 * V. Leave to Amend Is Granted.

Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a) requires that “leave [to amend] shall be freely given when justice so requires.” Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178, 182, 83 S.Ct. 227, 9 L.Ed.2d 222 (1962). When a motion to dismiss is granted, “the usual practice is to grant leave to amend the complaint.” 2A Moore & Lucas, Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 12.14 at 12-99 (2d ed.1989); see also Luce v. Edelstein, 802 F.2d 49, 56 (2d Cir.1986) (same rule for complaints dismissed under Rule 9(b)). Although the decision whether to grant leave to amend is within the discretion of the district court, refusal to grant leave must be based on a valid ground. Foman, 371 U.S. at 182, 83 S.Ct. 227. As a result, the plaintiffs may amend their complaint to address the deficiencies listed above.

Conclusion

For the foregoing reasons, the Complaint is dismissed in its entirety. Leave is granted replead all claims except for those based on New York City Administrative Code, Ch. 5, 20–700 et seq., which are dismissed with prejudice. Any amended complaint should be filed within thirty (30) days of the issuance of this opinion.

It is so ordered.