What is the test for substituting a plaintiff to a defendant in a motor vehicle accident case?

There are limitations to such substitutions, however: a "plaintiff proposed to be substituted may not 'state facts which give rise to a wholly distinct and different legal obligation against the defendant.'" Branick, 39 Cal.4th at 243. To explain this standard, Branick suggests a parallel with the relation back standard, saying that the new claim must: "(1) rest on the same general set of facts, (2) involve the same injury, and (3) refer to the same instrumentality, as the original one." Id. at 244, quoting Norgart v. Upjohn Co., 21 Cal.4th 383, 408 (1999) (emphasis in

Page 13