Thursday, March 18th, 2010...9:53 am
DAlaska: Doe Defendants and Rule 15 Relation Back
Jump to Comments
After a § 1983 plaintiff substituted named defendants for “Doe” defendants, the defendants moved to dismiss on the basis of the statute of limitations. U. S. District Judge Ralph Beistline noted that state law applies to the limitations period, and then held that the state version of Civil Rule 15 also applies. Here, where defense counsel (a state AAG) knew the identities of the Doe defendants before the statute ran, Alaska Civil Rule 15 dictated that the amendment related back to the original complaint. Beistline, thus, denied the motion to dismiss.
Johnson v. Wall, 4:09-cv-0031 (D.Alaska Mar. 16, 2010)
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.