Where the proposed amendments elaborated on specific facts supporting a plaintiff’s negligence claims that were progressively revealed through ongoing discovery, the Appellate Court holds that the new allegations related back to the date of filing of the original complaint and are not barred by the statute of limitations.
Reading the original complaint broadly but reasonably, the Appellate Court concludes that the amended allegations of negligence as to the way in which the plaintiff’s spinal surgery was performed related back to the allegations pleaded in the original complaint. The allegations proposed arose out of the same set of facts in the original complaint, the defendant’s failure to perform a safe and effective operation, which caused the plaintiff’s injury. The amendments did not allege a new theory but merely specified the precise way the defendants were allegedly negligent during the surgery.
Briere v. Greater Hartford Orthopedic Group, AC 36075 (June 23, 2015)