Anderson v. Alps Automotive, Inc.

Summary

The Supreme Court of Mississippi reviewed an interlocutory appeal involving the substitution of ALPS Automotive, Inc., for a fictitious defendant under Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure 9(h) and 15(c). The court held that Anderson’s more-than-nine-month delay after discovering ALPS’s identity was not reasonably diligent, so the amended complaint did not relate back and summary judgment for ALPS was affirmed.

Holdings

1. Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 9(h) requires a plaintiff to amend the complaint in a reasonably diligent manner after learning the true identity of a fictitious defendant; a delay of more than nine months, without a reasonable explanation, is unreasonable.
2. An amendment substituting a true defendant for a fictitious defendant relates back under Rule 15(c)(2) only if it is a proper amendment under Rule 9(h), which requires reasonable diligence in making the substitution.
3. The circuit court properly granted summary judgment to ALPS because Anderson's claims were time-barred and her delayed substitution did not relate back to the original complaint.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a nine-and-a-half-month delay after learning the identity of a fictitious defendant was unreasonable and demonstrated a lack of reasonable diligence under Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 9(h).
2. Whether Anderson's amendment substituting ALPS for a fictitious defendant was a proper amendment under Rules 9(h) and 15(c)(2) that related back to the original complaint and avoided the statute of limitations.
3. Whether the circuit court properly granted summary judgment to ALPS.

Disposition

affirmed