Grimm

Grimm v. Thayer

Bad Law
188 Cal. App. 3d 866·1987 Cal. App. LEXIS 1285·233 Cal. Rptr. 687
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 13, 1987E002750California1,424 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hews, J.

Plaintiff Maxine Grimm has appealed from a judgment in favor of defendant Joel Thayer following the granting of Thayer’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff’s action against Thayer and others seeks recovery of personal injury damages based upon the professional negligence of health care providers. Summary judgment was granted on the ground that the action against defendant Thayer was barred by the applicable one-year statute of limitations (§ 340.5.)

The issues on appeal are: (1) whether plaintiff was “ignorant of the name” of defendant Thayer within the meaning of section 474 so that an amendment naming him in place of a Doe defendant would relate back to the filing of the original complaint and (2) whether plaintiff’s notice of intention to sue (§ 364) tolled or suspended the limitations period as against Doe defendants.

Facts

Plaintiff was injured in an automobile accident on November 21, 1981, and was taken to Desert Hospital for treatment. X-rays were promptly taken of plaintiff’s head and neck region and she was told by her treating physician, Ali Tahmouresie, that she did not have a fracture of her neck or at least that the X-rays did not show a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.