Erie R. Co. v. Tompkins

Holding that state law governs substantive issues and federal law governs procedural issues

Walker v. Armco Steel Corp.

Holding that Oklahoma rules concerning service of process must be applied by federal courts adjudicating a dispute based on Oklahoma law

Trans-Spec Truck v. Caterpillar

Holding that filing of motion to amend eleven months after deadline established by scheduling order was unjustifiable, absent issues of estoppel

Hoyos v. Telecorp

Finding causation for restitution where defendant convicted of manufacturing child pornography

Rodriguez Narvaez v. Nazario

Holding that statutes of limitations exist to prevent defendants from being surprised by long-dormant causes of action

Rodríguez v. Suzuki Motor Corp.

Holding that the “tolling effect persisted until that action came to a ‘definite end’ ... when it was voluntarily dismissed”

Watson v. Unipress, Inc.

Ruling that an unnamed defendant must be dismissed only because the statute of limitations had run and the plaintiff's eventual identification of this unnamed defendant did not relate back to the date of the original complaint

Melendez v. Hospital Hermanos Melendez

In Melendez, the court stated that the plaintiff had to satisfy all of PRRCP 13.3 before the court would allow relation back.

Santiago v. Becton Dickinson Co., S.A.

In Santiago, the plaintiff had to satisfy only the first part of the rule: that the claim arose out of the same conduct, transaction, or occurrence.

Ramos v. Continental Insurance Company

Holding that the Puerto Rico direct action statute allows the injured to bring a separate cause of action against the insurer

Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Section 1332 - Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs

Holding district court has jurisdiction over action between diverse citizens "where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000"

Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings

Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

Rule 4 - Summons

Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time

Section 1367 - Supplemental jurisdiction

Holding that in civil actions proceeding in federal court based solely on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the district court "shall not have supplemental jurisdiction" over "claims by plaintiffs against persons made parties under Rule . . . 24" or "over claims by persons . . seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24," if "exercising supplemental jurisdiction over such claims would be inconsistent with the jurisdictional requirements of section 1332"

Rule 3 - Commencing an Action

Stating that once the inmate has filed his motion with the clerk, "[t]he clerk must file the motion and enter it on the criminal docket of the case in which the challenged judgment was entered"

§ 5298. Actions which prescribe in one year

Providing a one-year statute of limitation for "[a]ctions to demand civil liability ... for obligations arising from the fault or negligence mentioned in § 5141 of this title, from the time the aggrieved person had knowledge thereof"

§ 2003. Suits against insured, insurer