Family Attorney
U.S. District Court VA Western Case Summaries: August 20, 2007.
|
|
In this 42 U.S.C. Sect. 1983 action arising out of a jail suicide, the district court holds that under Fed. R. Civ. P. 15©, plaintiff’s claim against a new defendant relates back to the original claim, so as to prevent the bar of the statute of limitations. Based on recent 4th Circuit precedent, I find the claim relates back and deny the motion to dismiss. In this negligence action, the original defendants were the County of Buchanan, the county sheriff’s office, the Commonwealth of Virginia, the state department of corrections and two deputies. The commonwealth and its department of corrections were dismissed by stipulation, and the county later was dismissed by stipulation. Plaintiff then filed an amended complaint naming the sheriff as a defendant. Plaintiff did not object to dismissal of the County of Buchanan Sheriff’s Office. The sheriff now seeks dismissal of the claim against him, pleading the bar of the statute of limitations. Service of the original complaint was obtained on the sheriff’s office by personally serving the sheriff on March 14, 2007. The sheriff is represented by the same counsel as the sheriff’s office and the other two remaining individual defendants and there is no claim of prejudice. The real question is whether, as required by Rule 15©(3)(B), the sheriff knew or should have known that but for a mistake concerning the identity of the proper party, he would have been named. In Goodman v. Praxair Inc., [VLW 007-2-120], the 4th Circuit recently clarified the proper interpretation of Rule 15©. Earlier decisional interpretation had focused on the type of mistake involved, and whether it resulted from clerical error, lack of knowledge of the identity of the proper defendant, or strategic error or oversight. Goodman held that instead the focus must… Source : accessmylibrary.com |
Related Articles from Attorney for Family
U.S. District Court VA Western Case Summaries: October 8, 2007.
Certification - Bankruptcy Question Because an order of the bankruptcy court involves a question of law as to which there is no controlling decision from the 4th Circuit or the U.S. Supreme Court, the district court grants the creditor's motion for certification. The creditor contends the bankruptcy court erred in overruling its objection to confirmation of debtors' Chapter 13 plan and holding that the Bankruptcy Code allows debtors to surrender the creditor's collateral, a financed automobile, in full satisfaction of its secured claim. The question that must be decided is what happens when as a result of the hanging paragraph
Verdicts & Settlements August 13, 2007
Plaintiff, Donald Barrett, was a header for defendant, Detroit Heading, LLC, a manufacturer of screws, nuts, and bolts for the automotive industry. Mr. Barrett suffers from hypertension. He had previously been hospitalized for this condition and had been regularly treated for it by his primary care physician, Dr. Vincent Maribao. On November 1, 2004, Barrett's wife -- a competency-evaluated nursing assistant -- took his blood pressure. His... Source : accessmylibrary.com
U.S. District Court VA Eastern Case Summaries: November 20, 2006.
A Norfolk federal district judge adopts the reasoning of US Airways Inc. v. PMA Cap. Ins. Co., 340 F. Supp 2d 699 (E.D. Va. 2004), and holds that a defendant must remove an action based on diversity within one year from the time plaintiff has filed a motion for judgment in state court; the removal effort here fails and this products liability case is remanded to state court. The propriety of removal in this case turns on whether defendant's notice of removal was timely filed under 28 U.S.C. Sect. 1446(b). The defendant must remove an action within 30 days of
Ninth Judicial District receives grant for ’self-help law program’
For many people, to try to resolve a legal issue before the court - a name change to a landlord-tenant conflict, divorce - to confuse a more expensive experience. Because of the expense, some trying to navigate Montanans Justice and the court system without a lawyer - representing itself or procedure "for the" use of the concept of jurisdiction Latin. This for the parties to move often local Clerk of Court's Office or a judge of the searching for help in finding the right form and the procedure for resolving their legal problems. However, the Ninth Judicial District Court, Teton,
Interest’ Stands In Custody Disputes
The Colorado Supreme Court has ruled that a child's best interest should prevail in some kinds of custody disputes that arise after the parents die, even if that conflicts with the parents' will. Attorneys say the decision, handed down Monday, could have broad implications for other custody cases. The justices ordered a lower court to reconsider who should be named guardian of a 22-month-old girl whose father, Pfc. Stephen Sherwood, shot and killed his wife, Sara, and himself in August. The lower court had ruled that Stephen Sherwood's mother, Kathleen Taylor Nace, should be the guardian because that's what both Sherwoods directed