Background
Jack Darty was injured in an April 2018 car accident involving Nicholas Hall and Skye Ortiz. An MRI soon after the accident showed a complex medial meniscus tear in Darty’s left knee. His orthopedic surgeon discussed surgery in 2018 and advised that conservative treatment would likely lead to surgery, but Darty elected nonoperative care.
Darty sued Hall and Ortiz in October 2019. In June 2021, discovery disclosed that Hall had $50,000 in liability coverage. Darty ultimately underwent knee surgery in May 2023. In June 2024, he moved to amend his complaint to add his own insurer, Mississippi Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company, seeking uninsured/underinsured-motorist benefits. The circuit court allowed the amendment but later granted Farm Bureau summary judgment on limitations grounds.
The Court’s Holding
The Court of Appeals affirmed. A UM-benefits claim is subject to Mississippi’s three-year limitations period, which begins when the insured knows or reasonably should know that damages exceed the alleged tortfeasor’s available coverage. The court held that Darty knew in 2018 that his knee injury likely would require surgery and learned Hall’s $50,000 coverage limit on June 22, 2021. His UM claim therefore accrued by that date.
Darty did not add Farm Bureau until September 2024. His June 2024 motion to amend did not toll limitations because the circuit court did not grant it until after the limitations period expired. The amended complaint also did not relate back under Rule 15(c): the original negligence complaint did not assert a contract claim against Farm Bureau, and Farm Bureau was not added because of a mistake about the proper defendant’s identity.
Key Takeaways
- A UM claim accrues when the insured reasonably knows both the extent of the damages and that the tortfeasor’s available coverage is inadequate.
- Filing a motion for leave to amend does not toll the statute of limitations until the court grants the motion.
- Adding a UM insurer after limitations expires does not relate back merely because the claim stems from the same auto accident.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores that insureds should promptly assert UM claims once they know the tortfeasor’s policy limits and have sufficient information to recognize that their damages may exceed those limits. Choosing to postpone recommended treatment does not postpone accrual where the claimant already knew the injury’s likely extent and treatment options.