Joseph v. Elan Motorsports Technologies Racing Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that if an amended complaint relates back, it would \defeat the defense of statute of limitations\
• explaining that district court should have permitted amendment to replace mistakenly named affiliate with actual corporate defendant
• “Amending the complaint . . . was entirely proper; whether the complaint would relate back to the date when the original complaint was filed and thus defeat the statute of limitations was a separate question.”
• addressing meaning of unambiguous insurance policy terms on motion for summary judgment
• “Amending the complaint . . . was entirely proper; whether the amendment would relate back to the date when the original complaint was filed and thus defeat the defense of statute of limitations was a separate question.”
• limiting analysis under Rule 15(c)(1)(C)(ii) to “whether the defendant who is sought to be added by the amendment knew or should have known that the plaintiff, had it not been for a mistake, would have sued him instead or in addition to suing the named defendant”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).