California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Hutnick v. U.S. Fidelity & Guar. Co., 199 Cal.App.3d 49, 244 Cal.Rptr. 725 (Cal. App. 1988):
"We later traced the evolution of the relation back doctrine in Smeltzley v. Nicholson Mfg. Co. (1977) 18 Cal.3d 932 [136 Cal.Rptr. 269, 559 P.2d 624, 85 A.L.R.3d 121], and formulated a general rule: An amended complaint relates back to the original complaint, and thus avoids the statute of limitations as a bar against named parties substituted for fictitious defendants, if it: (1) rests on the same general set of facts as the original complaint; and (2) refers to the same accident and same injuries as the original complaint. (Id., at pp. 936-937 [136 Cal.Rptr. 269, 559 P.2d 624].)" (39 Cal.3d at pp. 150-151, 216 Cal.Rptr. 405, 702 P.2d 563.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.