New York Partner Brian Heermance and Associate Namita Mehta recently obtained a judgment dismissing the complaint in a dental malpractice action upon a pre-answer motion. The plaintiff filed the original Summons and Complaint naming our client as “Jane Doe” in the matter. An Amended Summons and Complaint was filed after the expiration of the statute of limitation naming the client. The Court granted our motion and found that the plaintiff failed to exercise due diligence to discover the identity of the Jane Doe defendant prior to the expiration of the statute of limitation. Therefore, since the Complaint was not amended nor served within the statute of limitations, our motion to dismiss was granted.