1. Test your knowledge of the relation back doctrine with the following problem:

Assume that during the course of an arrest in Peoria Heights two police officers handcuff the detainee and he suffers broken bones. The detainee is later released without being charged. Two years after the event, the detainee sues the Peoria Heights Police Department and “two unknown named police officers.” After the statute of limitations has run, plaintiff amends his complaint and specifically names the two officers who arrested him, but includes no claim against the police department. The newly named defendants, represented by the same attorney who represents the police department, move to dismiss the amended complaint on the ground that the statute of limitations has run. The record indicates that the police officers did not know of the lawsuit before the limitations period expired, but they were aware of its pendency within the extra one hundred twenty days provided by Rule 15(c).

639 Do the belated claims relate back under Krupski? Did plaintiff make a “mistake” about the identity of the arresting officers or did he simply not know their identity? Would it be relevant if the officers concealed their identity, and that under state law fraudulent concealment tolls the statute of limitations? See Worthington v. Wilson, 8 F.3d 1253 (7th Cir. 1993).