There are occasions when, despite a party’s best and most diligent efforts, it is not ascertained until after the statute of limitations has expired that a necessary party defendant is missing from the litigation. Under certain circumstances, the doctrine of relation back may allow the plaintiff to add such a new party after the expiration of the statute of limitations. This doctrine may apply where the new defendant is "united in interest" with a party over whom jurisdiction has been timely obtained.
The relation back doctrine is codified in CPLR §203, which provides that for purposes of computing the statute of limitations, a claim asserted in a complaint is interposed against the defendant or a codefendant united in interest with such defendant when the action is commenced. Thus, where the relation back doctrine is found applicable, an action will be deemed timely commenced against a defendant, notwithstanding the expiration of the statute of limitations, provided that this party is found to be "united in interest" with a defendant against whom the action was timely commenced.1
Three-Pronged Test
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
