§ 474.Plaintiff Ignorant of Name of Defendant
Title 6. Of the Pleadings In Civil Actions · Chapter 8. Variance—Mistakes in Pleadings and Amendments · Last amended 1955 · Last verified July 28, 2026
Full Text of § 474
Plain-English Summary
Section 474 is the source of California’s famous "Doe defendant" practice. When a plaintiff does not yet know a defendant’s real name at the time of filing, the plaintiff must say so in the complaint (or the affidavit, if the action was commenced by affidavit) and may designate that defendant by any name — Doe 1, Doe 2, and so on are the usual convention, though the statute itself does not require that specific label. Once the plaintiff discovers the defendant’s true name, the pleading or proceeding must be amended to substitute it in.
This mechanism exists because a plaintiff often cannot identify every responsible party before the statute of limitations would otherwise close the door on suing them. By naming a fictitious defendant within the original complaint and later substituting the true name, a plaintiff preserves a claim against that defendant as of the original filing date rather than having to file a brand-new action once the name comes to light — provided the plaintiff did not in fact know the name (or facts giving rise to a cause of action against that defendant) at the time of filing.
The statute conditions a default or default judgment against a Doe-named defendant on giving that defendant fair warning of what is happening. The summons or other process served — or, if none was used, the first pleading or notice served — must carry on its face a notice substantially stating: "To the person served: You are hereby served in the within action (or proceedings) as (or on behalf of) the person sued under the fictitious name of (designating it)." The certificate or affidavit of service must likewise state the fictitious name under which the defendant was served and confirm that the identity notice was endorsed on the document served. These default-entry safeguards apply only to defendants sued under a fictitious name designated this way — not to a defendant the plaintiff sued under the wrong real name by mistake — and they drop away entirely once a default or default judgment rests on service of an amended pleading, process, or notice using the defendant’s true name.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is a "Doe defendant" in a California lawsuit?
It is a defendant named by a fictitious designation under § 474 because the plaintiff did not know that defendant’s true name when the complaint was filed, with the true name substituted in by amendment once discovered.
Does suing someone as a Doe defendant preserve my claim against the statute of limitations?
The practical effect of § 474 is that an amendment substituting the true name for a properly designated Doe defendant relates back to the original filing date, so long as the plaintiff did not in fact know that defendant’s identity or the facts giving rise to the claim against that defendant when the complaint was filed.
Can I get a default judgment against a Doe defendant without giving any special notice?
No. Section 474 bars entry of a default or default judgment against a fictitiously named defendant unless the summons or other first-served document carried, on its face, the notice the section prescribes, and the proof of service documents that notice.
What if I sued the defendant under the wrong real name instead of a fictitious name?
Section 474’s default-entry notice requirements apply only to defendants designated by a fictitious name under this section — they do not apply where the plaintiff sued the defendant under an erroneous name.
Do I still need the fictitious-name notice once I’ve amended to use the defendant’s true name?
No. Section 474 states its notice requirements for entry of default do not apply once the default or default judgment is based on service of an amended pleading, process, or notice designating the defendant by the true name.
Amendment History
Amended by Stats. 1955, Ch. 886.