Legal Opinion
Jacobsen v. Osborne
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided January 16, 1998No. 97-30098PublishedCited by 274 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RHESA HAWKINS BARKSDALE, Circuit Judge:
Primarily at issue is whether, pursuant to Fed. R. Crv. P. 15(c)(3), a proposed amendment to a complaint to add new parties relates back to the date of the original complaint, especially for replacing “John Doe” defendants, thereby defeating a limitations bar as to those putative parties. For his action seeking relief under, inter alia, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Michael Jacobsen appeals the denial of his motion to amend in order to substitute the correct defendants (police officers and sheriffs deputies) for an erroneously named officer and a “John Doe” deputy.…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Schiavone v. FortuneSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Moore v. McDonaldCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1994
- Leffall v. Dallas Independent School DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1994
- In the Matter of Southmark Corporation, Debtor. Southmark Corporation v. Schulte Roth & ZabelCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1996
- Richard Worthington, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Dave Wilson and Jeff Wall, and Village of Peoria Heights, Defendant/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1993
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by274 opinions
- Goodman v. Praxair, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2007
- Edward Arthur v. Maersk, Inc. D/B/A Maersk Line Ltd. Dyn Corp. Technical Services D/B/A Dyn Marine Services the United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2006
- Herrmann Holdings Ltd. v. Lucent Technologies Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2002
- Singletary v. Pennsylvania Department Of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2001
- Mary Smith v. Regional Transit Authority, eCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2016
269 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.