Commonwealth v. Derosier

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding burden of confusion of corporate entities on defendant where “Costa Cruise and Costa Crociere are related corporate entities with very similar names”
• holding “that relation back under Rule 15(c)(1)(C} depends on what the party to be added knew or should have known”
• stating that Rule 15(c)(1)(C) “asks what the prospective defendant knew or should have known during the Rule 4(m) period”
• holding district courts should consider the added party’s knowledge, not the amending party’s knowledge or timeliness
• explaining that an amended pleading that relates back to a timely filed pleading “is . . . itself timely even though it was filed outside an applicable statute of limitations”
• describing “the preference expressed in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in general ... for resolving disputes on their merits”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).