Gonzalez v. Rochester

W.D. New York

Gonzalez v. Rochester

DecidedOctober 4, 2022

Docket6:16-cv-06652

StatusUnknown

This text of Gonzalez v. Rochester (Gonzalez v. Rochester) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gonzalez v. Rochester, (W.D.N.Y. 2022).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ___________________________________________ JOSE M. GONZALEZ, DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff, 16-CV-6652L v. CITY OF ROCHESTER, et al., Defendants. ___________________________________________ On January 25, 2022, plaintiff’s counsel filed a Notice of Suggestion of Death (Dkt. #26), stating that the sole plaintiff in this action, Jose M. Gonzalez, had died on or about August 13, 2021. Counsel also filed a copy of plaintiff’s Certificate of Death. (Dkt. #26-1.) Pursuant to Rule 25(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court entered a text order on March 16, 2022, giving the parties 90 days to make a motion for substitution, and

stating that if no such motion were filed during that timeframe, the action would be dismissed. (Dkt. #27.) More than 90 days have elapsed since the entry of that text order, and no motion for substitution has been made, nor has any other activity occurred in the action. Accordingly, the action must be dismissed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a); Chobot v. Powers, 169 F.R.D. 263, 267 (W.D.N.Y. 1996) (“[A]s more than ninety days have passed since such service [of the suggestion of the plaintiff’s death], and as there has been no motion pursuant to Rule 25(a)(1) to substitute a party on behalf of [the plaintiff], dismissal of the action is appropriate”). CONCLUSION

The complaint in this action is dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a)(1). IT ISSO ORDERED.

DAVID G. LARIMER United States District Judge Dated: Rochester, New York October 4, 2022.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ___________________________________________ JOSE M. GONZALEZ, DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff, 16-CV-6652L v. CITY OF ROCHESTER, et al., Defendants. ___________________________________________ On January 25, 2022, plaintiff’s counsel filed a Notice of Suggestion of Death (Dkt. #26), stating that the sole plaintiff in this action, Jose M. Gonzalez, had died on or about August 13, 2021. Counsel also filed a copy of plaintiff’s Certificate of Death. (Dkt. #26-1.) Pursuant to Rule 25(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court entered a text order on March 16, 2022, giving the parties 90 days to make a motion for substitution, and

stating that if no such motion were filed during that timeframe, the action would be dismissed. (Dkt. #27.) More than 90 days have elapsed since the entry of that text order, and no motion for substitution has been made, nor has any other activity occurred in the action. Accordingly, the action must be dismissed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a); Chobot v. Powers, 169 F.R.D. 263, 267 (W.D.N.Y. 1996) (“[A]s more than ninety days have passed since such service [of the suggestion of the plaintiff’s death], and as there has been no motion pursuant to Rule 25(a)(1) to substitute a party on behalf of [the plaintiff], dismissal of the action is appropriate”). CONCLUSION

The complaint in this action is dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a)(1). IT ISSO ORDERED.

DAVID G. LARIMER United States District Judge Dated: Rochester, New York October 4, 2022.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Gonzalez v. Rochester, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gonzalez-v-rochester-nywd-2022.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack