 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Dakin v. Marciniak3/8/2005
eve the identity of Pease's employer would not have emerged, as it eventually did, through timely discovery. Speculation after the fact about why an investigation might have failed does not alter the fact that Dakin never attempted any investigation, before the statute of limitations expired, of a defendant known to her in April 2000. Dakin simply did nothing that might have produced more information and we conclude that, in this case, doing nothing was not an exercise of reasonable diligence.
. Because we conclude that any notice to Roundy's in Dakin's initial complaint was insufficient to satisfy Wis. Stat. ยง 802.09(3) and that the discovery rule does not bar the application of the statute of limitations to Dakin's complaint, we reverse the order and remand the matter to the circuit court with directions to grant a summary judgment in favor of Roundy's, thereby dismissing it from the lawsuit.
By the Court.-Order reversed and cause remanded with directions.
Recommended for publication in the official reports.
Ordered published (04-29-2005).
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Wisconsin Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|