Crowl v. Kayo Oil Co.

The dispositive issue on this appeal, involving a premises-liability question, is whether the plaintiff, whose complaint asserted claims against several fictitiously named defendants, as permitted by Rule 9(h), Ala.R.Civ.P., exercised "due diligence" to ascertain the name of the appellee in this case, Kayo Oil Company ("Kayo"), so that Kayo could be substituted as a defendant and the substitution of Kayo as a defendant would relate back to the date of the filing of the original complaint under the provisions of Rule 15(c), Ala.R.Civ.P.1

The trial court granted a Rule 12(b)(6), Ala.R.Civ.P.,…