Donoghue v. Gad
- Katherine Failla
- 1:21-cv-07182
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Donoghue v. Gad, Judge Failla granted substitution of Dennis Donoghue as plaintiff after Deborah Donoghue’s death.
Dennis Donoghue and Deborah Donoghue’s estate, as well as the parties to the shareholder action against Thomas Gad and involving nominal defendant Y-mAbs Therapeutics, Inc.
What happened
Deborah Donoghue brought a shareholder action against Thomas Gad on behalf of Y-mAbs Therapeutics, Inc., which was named as a nominal defendant. After Donoghue died during the case, Dennis Donoghue, her spouse and estate administrator, asked to replace her as plaintiff. Neither Gad nor Y-mAbs opposed the request.
The court applied Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25, which allows substitution when a party dies and the claim continues. The court found that the request was filed within the required 90-day period, that Donoghue’s claims survived her death, and that Dennis Donoghue was a proper replacement party as the estate’s administrator.
Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the motion to substitute and directed the Clerk of Court to replace Deborah Donoghue with Dennis Donoghue as plaintiff.
The detailed version
- Donoghue v. Gad · No. 1:21-cv-07182
- Katherine Failla
- Nov. 17, 2022
Background
Deborah Donoghue initiated a shareholder action against Thomas Gad on behalf of nominal defendant Y-mAbs Therapeutics, Inc. The opinion states that counsel notified the court of Donoghue’s death during the litigation. Dennis Donoghue, identified as her spouse and the administrator with limitations of her non-probate estate, moved to substitute himself as plaintiff. Neither Gad nor Y-mAbs opposed the motion.
Legal standard
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a)(1) governs substitution after a party’s death. The court explained that the moving party must show three things: the motion was timely, the claims were not extinguished by the death, and the proposed replacement is a proper party.
Court’s analysis
The court found all three requirements satisfied. First, it found the motion timely because it was filed within 90 days after counsel advised the court of Donoghue’s death. Second, it determined that Donoghue’s claims were not extinguished. The court cited authority stating that an action under Section 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act, seeking recovery of insider profits, may survive a party’s death. Third, the court determined that Dennis Donoghue was a proper substitute because he was the estate’s administrator.
Ruling
Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the motion to substitute. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motion at docket entry 93 and substitute Dennis Donoghue as plaintiff in the action.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.