October Term 2009 · Docket 09-337
Can a plaintiff amend a complaint to add a new defendant after the statute of limitations expires?
The dispute centers on whether a plaintiff's knowledge of the correct party's identity prevents amending a complaint to add that party after the filing deadline passes.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Bendure argued that Rule 15(c)(1)(C) permits adding new defendants after the limitations period expires.
Mr. Glazier argued that a plaintiff's knowledge of the proper party's identity can preclude a finding of mistake.
Justice Scalia questioned why a plaintiff would not read the contract carefully before filing suit.
Justice Roberts clarified that the issue involves the real name of the party who caused the injury.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 43-15 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 43-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-43 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 45-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 45-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 3-13 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 3-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 37-37 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 37-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-41 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 9-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 29-37 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 29-37
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the scope of Federal Rule 15(c)(1)(C). The rule allows adding new defendants after the limitations period ends. The core issue is whether a plaintiff's prior knowledge of the correct party's identity blocks this amendment.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 43-15 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 43-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-43 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-43
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 21, 2010.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the Court to allow the amendment. They argue knowledge of the correct party does not preclude relation back.
the opposing side wants the Court to deny the amendment. They argue the plaintiff knew the correct party and thus made no mistake.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 43-15 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 43-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-43 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-43
What each side says
the side that brought the case contends that a plaintiff's knowledge about the proper party's identity does not preclude a finding of mistake.
the opposing side contends that the ticket clearly identified the proper party, so no mistake occurred.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 43-15 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 43-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-43 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-43
What the justices asked
Justice Ginsburg asked if the name appeared anywhere other than page one of the general conditions.
Justice Scalia asked if the side that brought the case contests that the ticket clearly identified the proper party.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 45-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 45-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 3-13 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 3-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 37-37 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 37-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-41 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 9-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 29-37 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 29-37
Why it matters
This case defines the limits of amending complaints. It determines when plaintiffs can add parties after deadlines. It affects access to courts for injured parties. It clarifies the standard for mistake in identity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 43-15 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 43-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-43 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-43
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 45-49 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 45-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 31-33 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 31-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 37-49 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 37-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 15-21 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 15-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 5-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 3-13 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 3-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 37-37 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 37-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 37-41 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 37-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 9-15 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 9-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 29-37 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 29-37
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 43-15 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 43-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-43 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-43
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 19, lines 43-15 — Transcript, file page 19, lines 43-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-43 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-43
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.