Belated Amendment of Pleadings May Be Barred By Limitations

Litigants in state actions commonly take advantage of liberal rules governing amendment of pleadings to add claims well into the life of a case.  Sometimes, they do so even after the limitations period for bringing a claim has been exhausted.  In such a case, litigants argue that the proposed new claim “relates back” to the commencement of the other claims, and that if the limitations period governing the new claim had not already run when the action was commenced, then the court should allow it to be interposed.  As the argument goes, the other side should not be able to hide behind a time limitation protection when it knew all along that the claim might be asserted in the lawsuit.  This is especially true where the initially-alleged facts and circumstances in the lawsuit disclosed both the existence of the new claim and its relatedness to the already-pending claims.

Relation back cannot save all new claims from the running of limitations.  While defending clients against a multi-million dollar claim, DBR Law, P.A. recently prevailed against a plaintiff’s motion seeking to add a time-barred claim to a six year old lawsuit.  DBR Law, P.A. conceded that the potential new claim was known to its clients for years, but argued that the plaintiff repeatedly had taken the position -- for its own convenience -- that its case had nothing to do with the new claim.  DBR Law, P.A. argued in open court that the plaintiff’s own pleadings and statements showed an intent to infuse a wholly new approach six years into the lawsuit.  DBR Law, P.A. impressed upon the court that the motion to add the new claim was legally barred, was unfair to the parties and would have been meritless.  The Court agreed with DBR Law, P.A., in a lengthy, written opinion.

The moral of the story: even where the proposed new claim is known to the defendant, fairness may prevent litigants from completely, and unfairly, reversing course years into a lawsuit.