DeLeon v. Dunaway
- Nelson Roman
- 7:22-cv-06039
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 14
In DeLeon v. Dunaway, Judge Roman denied Douglas Dunaway’s dismissal motion without prejudice and stayed the action after a co-defendant’s reported death.
The order directly affected Douglas Dunaway’s motion to dismiss, the self-represented defendants’ filing rights, and the case’s proceedings concerning the reported death of Maria Louise Dunaway. It paused the action for 90 days and did not decide the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims.
What happened
DeLeon v. Dunaway involves Jason DeLeon, Ana Carraca-DeLeon, Ariela Rosa Mori-Gehring, and Walter Gehring as plaintiffs and Douglas Dunaway, Maria Louise Dunaway, and Michael Dunaway as defendants. The court received Douglas Dunaway’s request to dismiss the complaint and his filing reporting Maria Louise Dunaway’s death. Douglas Dunaway represented himself and also filed on behalf of other self-represented defendants.
The court denied Douglas Dunaway’s request to dismiss without prejudice, allowing him to file the motion again, because he did not follow the court’s requirement to request a conference before making another motion. The court also reminded him that he could file only for himself unless all self-represented defendants made a joint request and each signed it.
The court stayed the action for 90 days, until November 28, 2022, after receiving the reported death. Judge Nelson S. Roman directed the parties to the rule governing substitution after a party’s death, which states that the action against or by the deceased party must be dismissed if no substitution motion is made within 90 days after service of a statement noting the death.
The detailed version
- DeLeon v. Dunaway · No. 7:22-cv-06039
- Nelson Roman
- Aug. 30, 2022
Background
The plaintiffs are Jason DeLeon, Ana Carraca-DeLeon, Ariela Rosa Mori-Gehring, and Walter Gehring. The defendants are Douglas Dunaway, Maria Louise Dunaway, and Michael Dunaway. The opinion states that Douglas Dunaway and the other referenced defendants were representing themselves.
The court received two filings from Douglas Dunaway. One was a motion seeking dismissal of the complaint on several grounds, including lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue, insufficient service or process, failure to state a claim, and failure to join the Village of Mamaroneck Police Department. The other was a filing reporting the death of Maria Louise Dunaway under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25 and attaching a death certificate.
Dismissal Motion
The court acknowledged that self-represented litigants may receive more lenient treatment, but explained that representing oneself does not excuse compliance with procedural and substantive rules. The court’s individual rules required a party to request a pre-motion conference before making another motion. Because Douglas Dunaway did not follow that requirement, the court denied his motion to dismiss without prejudice with leave to refile.
The court also reminded Douglas Dunaway that he could make filings only on his own behalf. If the self-represented defendants wanted to make a joint request, the filing had to expressly identify it as a joint request and each self-represented defendant had to sign it.
Reported Death and Stay
After receiving the filing reporting Maria Louise Dunaway’s death, the court stayed the action for 90 days, through November 28, 2022. The court directed the parties to Rule 25(a)(1), which allows a party or the deceased party’s successor or representative to seek substitution. The rule provides that if a substitution motion is not made within 90 days after service of a statement noting the death, the action by or against the deceased party must be dismissed.
Other Direction
The clerk was directed to terminate the motion at ECF No. 21, mail a copy of the memorandum endorsement to Douglas Dunaway and Michael Dunaway, and show service on the docket. The opinion does not decide the merits of the plaintiffs’ claims or the grounds Douglas Dunaway raised in his proposed dismissal motion.
Read the full 14-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.