Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure; Statute Of Limitations; State Policy; Relation Back; Marshall V. Mulrenin, Gary I. Kruger
Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure; Statute Of Limitations; State Policy; Relation Back; Marshall V. Mulrenin, Gary I. Kruger
Akron Law Review
Some federal courts have followed the rule that amendments to correct misnomer or misdescription of a defendant will relate back where the proper defendant is in court. An amendment which substitutes or adds a new party, however, creates a new cause of action, and under such circumstances, there is normally no relation back to original filing for purposes of limitations.' Since the 1966 amendment of rule 15(c), however, a number of courts have permitted amendments substituting defendants after the statute of limitations has run.
The Unconstitutionality Of Ohio's Medical Malpractice Statute Of Limitations: Minors And Equal Protection, Eric A. Brandt
The Unconstitutionality Of Ohio's Medical Malpractice Statute Of Limitations: Minors And Equal Protection, Eric A. Brandt
Akron Law Review
As with all laws, statutes of limitations must apply equally to all persons unless reasonable grounds permit the legislating body to make distinctions between classes of persons affected by the law. Laws that operate unequally, unfairly and unreasonably when applied to the public are unconstitutional. The Ohio Supreme Court addressed was the constitutionality of an Ohio medical malpractice statute of limitations in Schwan v. Riverside Methodist Hospital.