Goodman v. Praxair, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
494 F.3d 458 (4th Cir. 2007)
After Tracer allegedly breached a contract with Goodman (plaintiff) and was acquired by Praxair Services (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Praxair, Inc.), Goodman sued only the parent Praxair, alleging it was Tracer's successor; when Praxair moved to dismiss arguing Praxair Services was the actual successor, Goodman amended the complaint to add Praxair Services, but only after the statute of limitations had run. The district court dismissed, finding the amendment did not relate back because Goodman's original omission reflected a lack of knowledge or poor strategy rather than a genuine clerical mistake or mistaken identity.
Whether an amended complaint adding a defendant's known, wholly-owned subsidiary as the true successor-in-interest relates back to the original complaint's filing date.