Ricardo Santana v. Holiday Inns, Inc., Gene Johnson, Randy Scheets, Bruce Faltin as Employees Holiday Inns, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that although the § 1981 claim in the original complaint was barred by the statute of limitations, the Title VII claim in the amended complaint related back
• permitting relation back where defendant “was not taken by surprise” by the new claim
• “It is apparent from [the plaintiffs] original complaint that [the defendant] was not taken by surprise by the addition of the claim for interference with employment relations.”
• original complaint alleging slander and amendment alleging interference with employment relations arose out of the same conduct or occurrence because both were based on defendant's making allegedly untruthful statements about plaintiff's behavior to plaintiff's employer
• original complaint alleging slander and amendment alleging interference with employment relations arose out of the same conduct or occurrence because both were based on defendant’s making allegedly untruthful statements about plaintiff’s behavior to plaintiff’s employer
• “Once the defendant is in court on a claim arising out of a particular transaction or set of facts, he is not prejudiced if another claim, arising out of the same facts, is added.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).