Opinion ID: 1229809
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Prejudice to later party

Text: Obviously, HFA will be prejudiced if it has to defend this lawsuit, but the type of prejudice contemplated by the rule is more than inconvenience. For relation-back to occur, the added party must receive such notice that the party will not be prejudiced in maintaining a defense on the merits. Minn.R.Civ.P. 15.03(1). In this case, the fact that HFA received notice of the lawsuit after the limitations period does not, by itself, prejudice its ability to defend the case on the merits. There is no indication that witnesses' memories faded or health-care records were discarded during the 16 days from October 22 to November 7, 1988. In sum, it does not appear that HFA would be prejudiced in its ability to present a defense on the merits.