Merrit v. Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund
Also decided on this docket: La., June 3, 1994 637 So. 2d 501
Merrit v. Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund, 639 So. 2d 881 (La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1994).
Cited by
- Harold Fils v. Starr Indemnity & Liability Insurance Co. La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 2018
- Oliver v. Orleans Parish School Board 133 So. 3d 38 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 2014
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Giroir v. SOUTH LA. MEDICAL CTR., ETC. 475 So. 2d 1040
Opinion text
BARRY, Judge. The- fundamental purpose of a prescription statute is to afford security of mind to a defendant and protect against a stale claim. The amended claim arose out of the same conduct which was set forth in the original pleading. The plaintiffs in the amended claim were also parties in the original petition and are not “wholly new or unrelated.” See Giroir v. South La. Medical Center, Etc., 475 So.2d 1040 (La.1985) which sets out a four part test to determine whether an amendment relates back to the date of the original petition. The defendant was on notice that a claim arose out of the alleged malpractice which is sufficient notice that an additional claim might arise out of the originally pleaded facts. WRIT DENIED.