Varno v. Bally Manufacturing Co.
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHolmes, J.
The procedural issue presented on appeal is whether an amended complaint under Civ. R. 15(D), which substitutes the true name of a defendant that was previously designated by a fictitious name in the original complaint which was not served upon such defendant, relates back to the date of filing the original pleading for the purposes of the statute of limitations.1 Throughout this litigation, appellant has maintained that Civ. R. 15(D) should be read in conjunction with Civ. R. 3(A) so that if service is obtained on the unknown defendant within one year of filing the complaint, the action is…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Vocke v. City of DaytonOhio Court of Appeals · 1973
- Jack Davis Painting Co. v. Eller Enterprises, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1982
3Cited by12 opinions
- Erwin v. BryanOhio Supreme Court · 2010
- Amerine v. Haughton Elevator Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1989
- Pearson v. ColumbusOhio Court of Appeals · 2014
- Keller v. Honeywell Protective ServicesDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 1990
- Erwin v. Bryan, 08-Ca-28 (2-10-2009)Ohio Court of Appeals · 2009
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.