Tysheia Garvin v. City of Philadelphia Police Officer John Doe

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the court in Singletary “recognized that there are two possible methods” of imputing notice under Rule 15(c) (emphasis added)
• holding that replacing the name John Doe with a party’s real name “amounts to the changing of a party or the naming of a party under Rule 15[(c)(1)]”
• noting that the relation back doctrine “aims to ameliorate the harsh result of the strict application of the statute of limitations”
• noting that there is a two-year statute of limitations for such actions in Pennsylvania
• explaining that “[t]he parties to be brought in by amendment must have received notice of the institution of the action within 120 days following the filing of the action, the period provided for service of the complaint by Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure”
• noting the newly added defendants “must have received notice of the institution of the action within [90] days following the filing of the action[.]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).