Legal Opinion
Carl Woods v. Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided June 14, 1993No. 92-2334PublishedCited by 96 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SHADUR, Senior District Judge.
We deal here with a proposed Amended Complaint that seeks to bring individual defendants into a federal civil rights action— persons who were not named as defendants before the expiration of the normal two-year statute of limitations after they had engaged in the conduct that allegedly violated plaintiffs constitutional rights. Because the district court did not properly take into account the provisions of Fed.R.Civ.P. (“Rule”) 15(e) in determining whether the Amended Complaint should relate back to the date of the original Complaint as to those newly-named…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Will v. Michigan Department of State PoliceSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Anderson v. CreightonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Ex Parte YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by96 opinions
- Tara Luevano v. Walmart Stores, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2013
- James T. Donald v. Cook County Sheriff's DepartmentCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1996
- Peirick v. Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis Athletics DepartmentCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007
- Santamarina, Guiller v. Sears RoebuckCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2006
- Sidney Lundy Claire Lundy v. Adamar of New Jersey, Inc., T/a Trop World, Defendant/third Party v. Dr. Domenic Frank Carlino, Individually Dr. Domenic Frank Carlino, a Professional Association, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
91 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.