1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. Cal.Rptr.2d
  4. 101 Cal.Rptr.2d
  5. 101 Cal.Rptr.2d 776 (2000)
 

FULLER v. TUCKER

No. B134916.

101 Cal.Rptr.2d 776 (2000)

84 Cal.App.4th 1163

Annie FULLER, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. James TUCKER, Defendant and Respondent.

Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Three.

November 17, 2000.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Stanton T. Mathews & Associates, Paul W. Ralph, Laguna Hills, and Carrie S. McLain for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Ralph Helton & Associates and Ralph G. Helton, Long Beach, for Defendant and Respondent.

ALDRICH, J.

INTRODUCTION

The trial court concluded plaintiff and appellant Annie Fuller (Fuller) did not properly amend her complaint to substitute in defendant and respondent Dr. James Tucker (Dr. Tucker) as a Doe defendant, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 474. We reverse. The trial court used the wrong legal standard in addressing the issue, and some of its factual findings are either not supported...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases