Small v. Ramsey
1:10-cv-00121
N.D.W. Va.Jun 27, 2011Background
- Three-car I-79 accident in winter 2009; Small injured when high-tension cable barrier snapped during McNeal's impact with Ramsey's Nissan.
- Wayne Concrete filed third-party complaint against Green Acres (subcontractor for cabling) and Small later asserted a direct claim against Green Acres.
- Plaintiff Small filed direct claim against Green Acres after Wayne Concrete's third-party action; claim filed 36 days after WV two-year statute expired.
- WV substantive law governs; Erie and lex loci delicti apply; two-year statute of limitations (W. Va. Code § 55-2-12) is implicated for the direct claim.
- Green Acres argues time-bar unless no substantial prejudice; Rule 14 allows claims arising out of the same transaction to be asserted against third-party defendants, but timing issues arise due to statute of limitations.
- Court posture: Green Acres moved to dismiss; court denied, holding no substantial prejudice shown and direct claim not time-barred under WV law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Small's direct claim is time-barred | Small argues WV law allows late direct claims against third parties. | Green Acres contends substantial prejudice from late filing. | Not time-barred; no substantial prejudice shown. |
| Whether WV substantial prejudice standard applies | Hickman supports late filing against third party absent prejudice. | Green Acres argues risk of exposure as first-party defendant. | Standard applied; no substantial prejudice shown. |
| What law governs the calculation and effect of the statute | Erie dictates WV substantive law governs. | Same; statute must be applied under WV law. | WV substantive law applies; two-year limit governs but not bar. |
| Role of Rule 14 in connection with timing | Rule 14 allows pleading against third party for arising from same occurrence. | Late filing interacts with statute of limitations. | Rule 14 does not bar the claim; late filing not prejudicial to dismissal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hickman v. Grover, 358 S.E.2d 810 (W. Va. 1987) (substantial prejudice required to bar late third-party claims)
- Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (Supreme Court 1938) (substantive law of forum applies in diversity cases)
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Mfg. Co., 313 U.S. 487 (Supreme Court 1941) (choice-of-law rules govern conflicts across jurisdictions)
- Vest v. St. Albans Psychiatric Hosp., Inc., 182 W. Va. 228 (W. Va. 1989) (lex loci delicti and choice of law in torts)
- Crum v. Equity Inns, Inc., 224 W.Va. 246 (W. Va. 2009) (right-to-repose doctrine discussed in limitations context)
- Rotella v. Wood, 528 U.S. 549 (Supreme Court 2000) (limitations and evidence preservation considerations)