en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fictitious_defendants

A fictitious defendant is a person that cannot be identified by the plaintiff before a lawsuit is commenced. Commonly this person is identified as "John Doe" or " Jane Doe". ... This page was last edited on 25 September 2016, at 19:04 (UTC).

scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1444&context=californialawreview

tiffs often rely on naming a fictitious "John Doe" as a defendant to preserve ..... Court: What You Don't Know Can Hurt You, 19 CARDozo L. REv. 1235 (1997) ...

tuplelegal.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/California-Assembly-Sexual-Harassment-Complaint-1.pdf

The true names and capacities of Defendants named as DOE 1 through DOE 10, ... 19. 8. Tammy Tran was the District Director (34th District) and Plaintiffs ...

scholars.law.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1638&context=nlj

sues, a number of questions as to changes in party defendants remain, which .... courts have stated that “only service constitutes notice,”19 and others have re- .... correctional officers he had originally sued by name or Doe designation and.

www.schlamstone.com/judge-feuerstein-grants-motion-to-dismiss-where-plaintiffs-failed-to-take-timely-steps-to-identify-jane-doe-defendant

Jun 7, 2018 ... Defendant moved to dismiss the complaint arguing that Jane Doe ... rise to this matter occurred on May 19, 2015, see generally Am. Compl., the ...

www.scscourt.org/complexcivil/105CV049053/volume3/201949e_Tabx16.pdf

19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. Michael D. McLachlan (State Bar No. ... the following defendants and having designated the defendants in the complaint by.

fordhamlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/20_Tomlinson-2071-2105.pdf

against John Doe defendants.19. Some have argued for a broader interpretation of Rule 15(c)'s mistake requirement even before Krupski shifted the relation ...

www.christian-attorney.net/amend-complaint-motion.html

... by the delay; such includes adding a new cause of action and an amendment naming a fictitious Doe defendant. ... (1941) 17 Cal.2d 13, 19; Nestle v. City of ...

ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5491&context=flr

against John Doe defendants.19. Some have argued for a broader interpretation of Rule 15(c)'s mistake requirement even before Krupski shifted the relation ...