Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

TIG Insurance v. Sedgwick James of Washington

Holding that conclusory assertions are insufficient to avoid summary judgment

Jacobsen v. Osborne

Holding that where change in naming parties was not the result of mistake, i.e., misidentification or misnomer, but because the plaintiff did not originally know the identity of the defendant, the relation-back doctrine does not apply

Braud v. Transport Service Co. of Illinois

Holding that, where the removing defendant was added after CAFA's effective date and then was later dismissed from the action, the district court could properly maintain jurisdiction over the "action" with regard to the remaining preCAFA defendants

Skoczylas v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

Recognizing that under Rule 15(c), "relation back is allowed as long as the added party had notice within 120 days following the filing of the complaint, or longer if good cause is shown"

Crisman v. Odeco, Inc.

Holding that a cause of action under general maritime law "accrues when a plaintiff has had a reasonable opportunity to discover his injury, its cause, and the link between the two"

Pretus v. Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc.

Holding that issues of fact existed as to when an offshore drilling rig worker should have discovered the seriousness of his medical condition, precluding summary judgment on statute of limitations grounds on the worker's Jones Act and general maritime law claims

Tapp v. Shaw Environmental, Inc.

Finding plaintiff's failure to "provide[] any evidence that [newly named defendant] had actual knowledge or should have been aware that it was an intended party to the suit within 120 days of the filing of original Complaint" precluded relation back of the claim against the newly named defendant

Taurel v. Central Gulf Lines, Inc.

In Taurel, the plaintiff was tested for asbestos-related problems, but his tests were negative; later, he was diagnosed with asbestosis.

Gifford v. Wichita Falls Southern Ry. Co.

Holding that amendment to pleadings is a procedural matter governed by federal law

Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

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

Section 30106 - Time limit on bringing maritime action for personal injury or death