Motion to dismiss improper party florida4/20/2024 However, in the context of misidentification, this Rule raises the possibility of dismissing all claims and/or voiding any judgment entered if the plaintiff fails to complete service of citation on the correct entity once discovering his or her mistake. – Houston 2003, rev’d on other grounds, 160 S.W. This rule is generally not an issue in misnomer cases as the correct defendant is served, even if service occurred under the incorrect name. Rule 124 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure provides that no judgment can be rendered against a defendant without proper service. Tolling may be permitted only if: (1) there are two separate but related entities using a similar name, (2) the correct entity had notice of the suit, and (3) the correct entity was neither misled nor prejudiced by the mistake. Texas recognizes a limited exception to the general rule against tolling in a misidentification case. App.-Corpus Christi 1980, no writ) (limitations barred negligence suit against driver of vehicle when original suit brought only against driver’s father and driver was not named or served until after the two-year statute of limitations period had run). Thus, courts have consistently held that a personal injury suit is properly barred as a matter of law based on limitations where a plaintiff misidentifies someone other than the intended defendant in the original petition and fails to amend and serve the proper defendant prior to the expiration of the statute of limitation. Additionally, in a situation of misidentification, there is no duty on the correct entity to point out the error or intervene in the case. On the other hand, misidentification generally does not toll the applicable limitations period. If the mistake is misnomer, the applicable limitations period is tolled and an amended petition identifying the defendant’s correct name relates back to the date the original petition was filed. In contrast, misidentification occurs when a plaintiff serves an incorrect entity, i.e. In the simplest (and most common) circumstances, misnomer occurs when a plaintiff serves the correct defendant under an incorrect name. It is easy to get these two mixed up, but there are several key distinctions that make proper identification of misnomer versus misidentification essential for understanding (1) the significance of the opposing party’s mistake and (2) what to do if presented with such a mistake.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |