Also known as: relation back · relation-back doctrine · relation back doctrine
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A procedural doctrine under which an amendment to a pleading is treated as filed on the date of the original pleading when the law supplying the applicable statute of limitations permits relation back.
Deanna Davenport sued Dover Bank in federal court under diversity jurisdiction for unauthorized account transfers. After the state limitations period expired, she moved to amend to add a fraud claim against an affiliated branch based on the same transfers. Because the forum state's limitations law expressly permits relation back for such amendments, the court treated the new claim as timely filed on the date of the original complaint.
Dominic Drake sued Drake Logistics for wrongful termination under state law. After the limitations period expired, he moved to amend to add a claim against a wholly owned subsidiary that handled the same employment actions. The shared officers and in-house counsel provided notice within the service period, so the court allowed the amendment to relate back under the governing state limitations law.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
An amendment relates back when the law that provides the applicable statute of limitations allows relation back. In diversity cases, federal courts therefore look to the state limitations law to determine whether the amendment is treated as filed on the date of the original pleading.
Supporting sources
Yes. Rule 15(c)(1)(A) expressly incorporates the state relation-back rule tied to the statute of limitations. When the state law permits relation back, the federal court must give effect to that allowance even if the federal standards alone would not.
Supporting sources
The amendment may relate back under both federal standards and state law. The key inquiry is whether the claim arises out of the conduct, transaction, or occurrence set out in the original pleading, allowing the court to treat it as timely despite an expired limitations period.
Supporting sources
…the effect of stress on identifications. However, the court barred testimony about the suggestiveness of the wanted board, the relation back of subsequent identifications to the initial identification, and the lack of a correlation between confidence and accuracy in eyewitness identifications. In January of 1990, Stevens was…