Stewart v. Gamero
Plaintiffs and appellants Dean Stewart and Jeanie Young (plaintiffs) sustained injuries when a vehicle owned and operated by Mercedes Gamero (Mercedes) rear-ended a vehicle driven by Daniel Montoya (Montoya), causing Montoyas vehicle to collide with plaintiffs vehicle. Prior to filing suit, plaintiffs attorney corresponded with Mercedess insurer, sometimes referring to Mercedes as the insured but other times referring to Francisco Gamero (Francisco)[1]as the insured. Plaintiffs filed suit just prior to the expiration of the statute of limitations, naming Francisco as the defendant, not Mercedes. Well after the statute of limitations had expired, plaintiffs filed and the trial court approved a form amendment to correct the name of the defendant (name correction amendment) by substituting Mercedess name for Franciscos pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure 473.[2]After allowing Mercedes to have her summary judgment motion heard less than 30 days prior to trial and reconsidering its order approving the name correction amendment, the trial court granted Mercedess motion for summary judgment on the grounds that plaintiffs claims against Mercedes were time barred.
Court hold that the trial court had inherent power to reconsider its prior orders, and that it properly exercised that power in this instance. We further hold that the grant of summary judgment was proper because the purported amendment under section 473 did not relate back to the filing date of the original complaint. Court therefore affirm the judgment.
Comments on Stewart v. Gamero