In re C.R. Bard, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation, 2:14-cv-06621. (2019)
Court: District Court, S.D. West Virginia
Number: infdco20190819f24
Visitors: 4
Filed: Aug. 16, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 16, 2019
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JOSEPH R. GOODWIN , District Judge . On November 15, 2018, plaintiff's counsel filed a Suggestion of Death noting the death of plaintiff Frances M. Clifford during the pendency of this action [ECF No. 15]. Defendants filed a Motion for Dismissal without Prejudice requesting dismissal of this case because the deceased plaintiff has not been substituted [ECF No. 16], and counsel for plaintiff responded [ECF No. 17]. Pretrial Order ("PTO") # 289 filed in In re: C
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER JOSEPH R. GOODWIN , District Judge . On November 15, 2018, plaintiff's counsel filed a Suggestion of Death noting the death of plaintiff Frances M. Clifford during the pendency of this action [ECF No. 15]. Defendants filed a Motion for Dismissal without Prejudice requesting dismissal of this case because the deceased plaintiff has not been substituted [ECF No. 16], and counsel for plaintiff responded [ECF No. 17]. Pretrial Order ("PTO") # 289 filed in In re: C...
More
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
JOSEPH R. GOODWIN, District Judge.
On November 15, 2018, plaintiff's counsel filed a Suggestion of Death noting the death of plaintiff Frances M. Clifford during the pendency of this action [ECF No. 15]. Defendants filed a Motion for Dismissal without Prejudice requesting dismissal of this case because the deceased plaintiff has not been substituted [ECF No. 16], and counsel for plaintiff responded [ECF No. 17].
Pretrial Order ("PTO") # 289 filed in In re: C. R. Bard, Inc., Pelvic Repair Sys. Prods. Liab. Litig., 2:10-md-2187 ("Bard 2187") [ECF No. 6195] outlines the procedures the court requires to either substitute a deceased party pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a), or to dismiss the deceased party from the civil action because of a failure to properly serve and substitute the deceased party.
The court FINDS that the Suggestion of Death did not comply with Rule 25(a) as it was never properly served upon parties, non-parties or a personal representative of the estate. Regardless, the time period as set forth in PTO # 289 to substitute a party has since passed. Therefore, the court ORDERS that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice and STRICKEN from the docket of this court. Any pending motions are DENIED as moot.
The court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this Order to counsel of record and any unrepresented party.
Source: Leagle
