Finkle v. Carroll

Summary

The dissent would have concluded that the plaintiff’s second action was saved by the wrongful-defendant statute because she mistakenly attributed the specific act of releasing the decedent’s killer to the wrong police officers. It rejected the view that the plaintiff’s additional allegations against other defendants, or the town’s potential liability under a different statutory theory, defeated the statute’s application. The dissent would have reversed the Appellate Court’s judgment and remanded with instructions to reinstate the withdrawn action and permit amendment. There are no separate opinions in the supplied record.