Willie Mae Veal v. J. P. Morgan Trust Company, N.A.

Summary

The Supreme Court of Mississippi affirmed orders striking a second amended complaint and dismissing newly named defendants without prejudice. The court held that Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 9(h) permits substitution of a true name for a genuinely fictitious party without leave of court, but does not permit adding new defendants accompanied by new factual allegations and theories. Because the plaintiff added new defendants, Rule 21 required court approval.

Holdings

1. Rule 9(h) does not require leave of court when the amendment merely substitutes the true name of a genuinely fictitious defendant and does not alter the content or substance of the complaint.
2. The J.P. Morgan, Eaton Vance, and related trustee defendants were new parties, not legitimate substitutions under Rule 9(h), because the original pleadings did not identify their existence or specific wrongful conduct and the Second Amended Complaint added new allegations and factual theories against them.
3. When an amendment adds new defendants, Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 21 requires an order of the court even if the existing adverse parties consent in writing under Rule 15(a). Failure to obtain that approval rendered the Second Amended Complaint improper.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 9(h) permits a plaintiff to substitute identified parties for fictitious defendants without obtaining leave of court.
2. Whether the identified J.P. Morgan and Eaton Vance defendants were legitimate substitutions for fictitious parties or were new parties added to the action.
3. Whether Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 21 requires court approval when an amended complaint adds new defendants, notwithstanding the existing defendants' written consent under Rule 15(a).

Disposition

affirmed