Rule 15.03.Relation back of amendments.
Current through June 18, 2026 · Last verified July 9, 2026
Full Text of Rule 15.03
Amendment History
(Amended October 18, 1977, effective January 1, 1978.)
Plain-English Summary
When a party amends a complaint or answer, the amendment normally counts as filed on the day it's submitted. Rule 15.03 changes that in one situation: if the new claim or defense arises from the same conduct, transaction, or occurrence already described in the original pleading, the amendment relates back to the date the original pleading was filed. That matters most when a statute of limitations has run in the meantime, because the earlier filing date can save the claim.
The rule also covers amendments that swap in a new defendant. Changing who's being sued relates back only if the underlying claim meets the same-transaction test above, and the new party learned of the lawsuit in time to defend without prejudice, and knew or should have known the suit would have named him but for a mistake about identity. The rule adds a specific path for cases against the Commonwealth: delivering or mailing process to the attorney general, or to the agency or officer who should have been named, satisfies the notice requirement for bringing in the Commonwealth or one of its agencies as a defendant.
Frequently Asked Questions
If I amend my complaint after the statute of limitations runs, does the new claim still count as timely?
It can. Under Rule 15.03, an amendment relates back to the date of the original pleading if the claim or defense in the amendment arose out of the same conduct, transaction, or occurrence already set out in the original pleading.
Can I add or substitute a defendant after the deadline to sue has passed?
Yes, if the conditions in Rule 15.03(2) are met: the claim arises from the same transaction or occurrence, and within the period allowed for suing that party, the new party received enough notice of the suit that defending on the merits won't be prejudiced, and knew or should have known the action would have named him but for a mistake about identity.
How do I satisfy the notice requirement when adding the Commonwealth of Kentucky as a defendant?
Rule 15.03(3) says delivering or mailing process to the attorney general, or to an agency or officer who would have been a proper defendant if named, satisfies the notice condition for bringing the Commonwealth or one of its agencies or officers into the action.