Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 31, 2022

Delpeche v. Tastes On The Fly New York, LLC

Judge
Alvin Hellerstein
Docket
1:21-cv-00893
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureEmployment
In one sentence

Delpeche v. Tastes On The Fly New York, LLC: Judge Hellerstein dismissed the case because no one moved to substitute a party within 90 days after Delpeche’s death was reported.

Who this affects

Katherine Delpeche’s action against Tastes On The Fly New York, LLC and the other defendants was dismissed because no motion to substitute a proper party was filed within the required 90-day period.

What happened

Delpeche v. Tastes On The Fly New York, LLC involved Katherine Delpeche’s claims of discrimination, harassment, and retaliation under federal, New York State, and New York City laws. Her counsel informed the court that she had died, and the defendants later moved to dismiss.

The court said that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25 requires dismissal when no motion to substitute a proper party is filed within 90 days after a statement reporting the party’s death is served. The statement was filed and served, more than 90 days passed, and no substitution motion was filed. No opposition to the dismissal motion was filed either.

Judge Hellerstein granted the motion to dismiss, dismissed the case, directed the Clerk to terminate all open motions, and ordered the case closed. The opinion did not decide whether the discrimination, harassment, or retaliation claims were legally valid.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Delpeche v. Tastes On The Fly New York, LLC · No. 1:21-cv-00893
Judge
Alvin Hellerstein
Date
Aug. 31, 2022

Background

Katherine Delpeche filed this action asserting discrimination, harassment, and retaliation claims under federal law, New York State law, and New York City law. The opinion states that Delpeche’s counsel informed the court on February 9, 2022, that Delpeche had died. A statement reporting her death, called a “Suggestion of Death,” was filed on April 20, 2022, with a certificate stating that it had been served on Delpeche’s counsel and at her last known address.

The opinion also states that counsel for both sides said reasonable efforts to contact Delpeche’s family had failed. No motion to substitute another proper party for Delpeche was filed. The defendant moved to dismiss on August 15, 2022, and no opposition was filed.

Rule and Analysis

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a)(1) allows a party or the deceased party’s successor or representative to ask the court to substitute a proper party when a party dies and the claim continues. The rule requires dismissal when no substitution motion is made within 90 days after a statement noting the death is served.

The court held that more than 90 days had passed since the statement of death was filed and served, and no substitution motion had been made. It therefore concluded that Rule 25(a) required dismissal. The court did not address the merits of Delpeche’s discrimination, harassment, or retaliation claims.

Disposition

The court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss. It dismissed the case, directed the Clerk to terminate all open motions, and ordered the case closed. The opinion did not state that the dismissal was with prejudice or without prejudice.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.