Nieves v. Jia
- Edgardo Ramos
- 1:21-cv-08753
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Nieves v. Jia, Judge Ramos dismissed the action because no one sought substitution after Nieves’s death within Rule 25’s deadline.
The dismissal affects Michael Nieves’s action against Shizhen Jia because no motion was filed to substitute a party after Nieves’s death. The appeal-related ruling affects anyone seeking to appeal without paying the required fees.
What happened
In Nieves v. Jia, the defendant told the court that pro se plaintiff Michael Nieves had died. The court paused the case and allowed anyone seeking to continue it to request substitution.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a)(1) requires a substitution request within 90 days after notice of a party’s death. Nearly a year passed without such a request.
Judge Ramos dismissed the action under Rule 25(a)(1). He also denied fee-free status for any appeal after finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Nieves v. Jia · No. 1:21-cv-08753
- Edgardo Ramos
- June 26, 2023
Background
Defendant Shizhen Jia advised the court on September 6, 2022, that pro se Plaintiff Michael Nieves had died. The court stayed the proceedings on September 8, 2022, while waiting for any party seeking to continue the action to file a motion to substitute another party.
Rule and analysis
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a)(1) provides that an action involving a deceased party must be dismissed if a motion for substitution is not filed within 90 days after service of a statement noting the death. The court stated that nearly a year had passed and that no motion for substitution had been filed.
Ruling
Judge Edgardo Ramos dismissed the action pursuant to Rule 25(a)(1). The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and denied fee-free status for purposes of an appeal. The order does not state any additional disposition or whether the dismissal permits refiling.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.