Armbruster v. Eskola, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123612 (M.D. Pa. July 15, 2024) (Mehalchick, Karoline J.)
Bianca Armbruster, v. Bradley D. Eskola, United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania decided, July 15, 2024.
This is our case, vehicle crash on Route 80. Was initiated by Doe Defendants, and after the statute ran, the actual name was put in. Court dismissed as violating the statute of limitations. Court indicated that the case is barred by the statute of limitations. Citing Pennsylvania Law, the court says the statute wronged to the person has reason to know of the injury that constitutes the basis of the cause of action. It cites a Third Circuit case, not Pennsylvania Law – which is different. Court stated that no further development of the factual record would be necessary. The toll principles of Pennsylvania are alluded to, but no Pennsylvania case is cited outside of the regular cases. The court referred to Pennsylvania will and civil procedure 2005, which is irrelevant.
The Court said that we improperly used the doe designation as a “catch-all” but did no reasonable search with due diligence, in an attempt to identify defendants. However, we knew of the defendant’s involvement in the accident even though we didn’t know why or how. Therefore the court states we could not have conducted a diligent search. We knew of the party, even if we did not know of their liability, and of course think that is enough.
