Goodman v. Praxair, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
494 F.3d 458 (2007)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Tracer Research Corp. (Tracer) allegedly breached a contract with Goodman (plaintiff). Subsequently, Tracer was purchased by Praxair Services, Inc. (Praxair Services) (defendant), which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Praxair, Inc. (Praxair) (defendant). Goodman brought suit against Praxair, alleging that it was the successor in interest to Tracer. Praxair filed a motion to dismiss on the grounds that Praxair Services was the true successor in interest to Tracer. Upon seeing this, Goodman amended its complaint to include Praxair Services. However, the amendment came after the expiration of the statute of limitations. The district court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss based on the statute of limitations. The district court held that Goodman’s amended complaint did not relate back to the original complaint, in part because Goodman’s mistake of not including Praxair Services in the original complaint was not clerical or the result of mistaken identity, but rather due to a lack of knowledge and/or poor strategy. Goodman appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Niemeyer, J.)
Concurrence (Gregory, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 777,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.