567 A.2d 154 (1989), the plaintiff sued the owner of the building in which she worked to recover damages for injuries she sustained when she slipped and fell. In her original complaint, she alleged that the defendant had negligently failed to maintain the premises by allowing the floor to become wet and slippery. After that claim was disposed of in favor of the defendant, on summary judgment, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint, alleging that the defendant had negligently constructed the portion of the building in which the plaintiff had fallen. In holding that the amended complaint did not relate back to the original complaint, we explained that the negligence claim set forth in the amended complaint involved facts tha ssoc., Inc., 67 Md.App. 48, 55-60, 506 A.2d 268 (1986) (<HOLDING>). Donnelly v. Yellow Freight System, Inc., 874
holding that breach of contract claim related back to misrepresentation claim because operative facts upon which the breach of contract claim was based were contained in the misrepresentation counts of the original complaint holding that trial court erred by dismissing breach of contract claim because appellee made promises to perform specific acts in contract the breach of which would give rise to a breach of contract action holding misrepresentation claim to be preempted recognizing that the elements of a claim for breach of contract are 1 existence of a valid contract and 2 breach of the terms of that contract holding that a breach of contract claim against one defendant related back to interference with contract claim against that defendant and breach of contract claim against second defendant because it was based on same set of operative facts