How to Add a Doe Defendant to a Complaint
What is a Doe Defendant?

In California, if you are ignorant of the name or identity of a defendant, you may still name that defendant in your complaint by naming him as a “Doe” (as in John Doe).

This is allowed by Code of Civil Procedure 474. [CCP 474].

This is why the caption in many legal Complaints filed in California read like this:

Henry Hurt,

Plaintiff.

vs.

Theresa Tortfeasor and DOES 1 to 50,

Defendants.

This can be a very useful tool. For example, even in a rear-end car crash case where the injured person knows the name of the driver, it is often prudent to add some DOE defendants. If it is later discovered that the defendant was driving another person’s car at the time of the car accident, the plaintiff can amend the complaint to replace DOE 1 with the name of the car’s owner.

Through this legal fiction, the car owner has been a party to the case from the beginning, only no one knew his name.

There are of course many complexities involved with adding DOE defendants, and a lawyer should always be consulted before attempting it.
What Do You Do After You Have Discovered The True Identity of a Doe Defendant?

The Complaint Must Be Amended – After the true identity of a “Doe” Defendant has been discovered, the complaint “must be amended accordingly” [CCP 474].

Plaintiff Gets One “Free” Amendment Early On – Before an answer has been filed, or before a demurrer has been heard, the plaintiff may amend the complaint once without permission from the court. [CCP 472]. The amended complaint must be served on the opposing party, and the time to respond will be based on the amendment, not on the original complaint.

After Answer or Demurrer, Plaintiff Must Seek Leave of Court to Amend – Most counties have simple forms that allow amendments of Doe defendant’s. Sacramento Superior Court’s Form can be found HERE. The court usually grants these “ex parte” – the form is simply filed with the court without notice to the opposing party, and the judge signs and returns it.

Once The Complaint Has Been Amended, Defendant Must Be Served – The newly added defendant must be served like any other defendant. It is probably a good idea to serve the defendant with both the summons, the complaint, and the amendment to the complaint, although it is not technically necessary to serve the defendant with the amendment, as long as the Proof of Service is filled out in such a way as to indicate that the defendant is being served as a DOE defendant:

(“2. NOTICE TO THE PERSON SERVED: You are served […]

b. Empty Checkbox as the person sued under the fictitious name of_______ .”

No Amended Summons Is Needed For DOE Defendants – Normally when a party is added, an amended summons is required. However, a DOE defendant may be served with the original summons. [CCP 412.10; Gillette v. Burbank Comm. Hosp. (1976) 56 Cal.App.3d 430, 433–434].
Can You Add a Doe Defendant After The Statute of Limitations Has Run?

You May Serve a DOE after the Statute Has Run If:

The original complaint named “Doe” defendants and stated a valid cause of action against them; and
The amended complaint is based on the same general set of facts; and
Plaintiff was genuinely ignorant of the defendant’s identity or liability at the time the original action was filed. [CCP 474; Austin v. Mass. Bonding & Ins. Co. (1961) 56 Cal.2d 596].

personal injury lawyer scales

This page is not legal advice, and there is no guarantee that this information is up to date. If you need legal advice, you should contact a lawyer.

This page was created by and (c) Noah Schwinghamer, a Sacramento Injury Lawyer. If you would like to copy this information, please request permission. Please feel free to link to this page.


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 4 hrs (2022-08-15 21:23:50 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Adding Doe Defendant California Law
Highlight Text
CaliforniaArticle

Code of Civil Procedure section 474 permits a plaintiff to amend complaints by adding parties as Doe defendants "when the plaintiff is ignorant of the name of a defendant" at the time the complaint is filed.

Code of Civil Procedure section 474 provides in pertinent part: "When the plaintiff is ignorant of the name of a defendant, he must state that fact in the complaint, or the affidavit if the action is commenced by affidavit, and such defendant may be designated in any pleading or proceeding by any name, and when his true name is discovered, the pleading or proceeding must be amended accordingly . . . ."

"The purpose of section 474 is to enable a plaintiff to avoid the bar of the statute of limitations when he or she is ignorant of the identity of the defendant." (Olden v. Hatchell (1984) 154 Cal. App. 3d 1032, 1037 201 Cal. Rptr. 715.)

The cases discussing section 474 deal with whether the plaintiff was truly ignorant of the identity of the person brought into the case as a Doe defendant because if that requirement is met, the amendment to the complaint relates back to the date the complaint was filed and the statute of limitations is preserved. (Parker v. Robert E. McKee, Inc. (1992) 3 Cal. App. 4th 512, 514 4 Cal. Rptr. 2d 347; Balon v. Drost (1993) 20 Cal. App. 4th 483 25 Cal. Rptr. 2d 12; Hazel v. Hewlett, supra, 201 Cal. App. 3d 1458; Munoz v. Purdy (1979) 91 Cal. App. 3d 942 154 Cal. Rptr. 472.)

For example, in Woo v. Superior Court (1999) 75 Cal. App. 4th 169, 176 89 Cal. Rptr. 2d 20, the court stated:

"If the requirements of section 474 are satisfied, the amended complaint substituting a new defendant for a fictitious Doe defendant filed after the statute of limitations has expired is deemed filed as of the date the original complaint was filed."

https://www.lawpipe.com/California/Adding_Doe_Defendant_Cali...