25 F. Supp. 3d 163
D. Mass.2014Background
- Plaintiffs seek to substitute five named officers for four John Does in a §1983/§1985/Mass. rights action relating to a warrantless home entry/search in Aug 2010.
- City and Fitchet oppose as untimely and not relating back under Rule 15(c)(1)(C); court will allow under Rule 15(c)(1)(A).
- Original complaint filed July 31, 2013 in Hampden County Superior Court against City, Fitchet, and John Does; removed to federal court Aug 14, 2013.
- Scheduling order set amendment deadline (Feb 25, 2014) later extended to Apr 15, 2014; motion filed Apr 14, 2014.
- Massachusetts law provides liberal relation-back under M.G.L. ch. 231, § 51, and a three-year limitations period for the underlying state claims; Massachusetts relation-back rules apply in this §1983 context.
- Court finds that substitution relates back under Rule 15(c)(1)(A) and that undue delay or prejudice is not demonstrated; 15(c)(1)(C) is not required, though discussed; Local Rule 15.1 noncompliance noted but not fatal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether amendment relates back under Rule 15(c)(1)(A). | Plaintiffs rely on more forgiving state relation-back law. | City/Fitchet argue only under Rule 15(c)(1)(C). | Yes; relates back under Rule 15(c)(1)(A). |
| Whether Rule 15(c)(1)(C) would govern relation back here. | If not 15(c)(1)(A), 15(c)(1)(C) could save the amendment. | Arguments framed around 15(c)(1)(C) may apply in some contexts. | Not controlling; court uses 15(c)(1)(A) to allow amendment. |
| Whether the amendment is unduly delayed or prejudicial. | Delay is acceptable post-complaint filing and within court deadlines. | Potential prejudice or futility could bar amendment. | No undue delay or prejudice; amendment allowed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Morel v. DaimlerChrysler AG, 565 F.3d 20 (1st Cir.2009) (state-law based relation back may govern if more forgiving)
- Coons v. Industrial Knife Co., Inc., 620 F.3d 38 (1st Cir.2010) (Rule 15(c)(1)(A) alignment with state relation back)
- Singletary v. Pennsylvania Dept. of Corrections, 266 F.3d 186 (3d Cir.2001) (John Doe amendments; relation back under 15(e) context)
- Hogan v. Fischer, 738 F.3d 509 (2d Cir.2013) (borrowed limitations and relation back in §1983 context)
- Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261 (1985) (origin of borrowed state-law limitations for §1983)