Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 6, 2023

Perez v. Escobar Construction, Inc.

Judge
Laura Swain
Docket
1:20-cv-08010
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

Perez v. Escobar Construction: Judge Gorenstein granted plaintiffs a 90-day extension to seek substitution for deceased opt-in plaintiff Oscar Garza.

Who this affects

The ruling affected the plaintiffs, the estate of deceased opt-in plaintiff Oscar Garza, and the defendants by extending the deadline for seeking substitution until September 4, 2023.

What happened

In Perez v. Escobar Construction, Inc., the plaintiffs asked for 90 more days to file a request replacing deceased opt-in plaintiff Oscar Garza with a proper representative of his estate. They said no representative had yet been appointed because the estate was having difficulty locating Garza’s heirs.

The plaintiffs’ lawyer said a probate application had been filed and that the probate process could take between three months and three years. The defendants had not filed papers opposing the request, although the plaintiffs said the defendants did not consent.

Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein granted the 90-day extension, setting September 4, 2023, as the new deadline. He warned that further extensions were unlikely and would require a detailed sworn statement describing the estate’s efforts to appoint a representative.

The detailed version

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

Case
Perez v. Escobar Construction, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-08010
Judge
Laura Swain
Date
July 6, 2023

Background

Plaintiffs moved for a 90-day extension of the deadline to file a motion substituting a party for deceased opt-in plaintiff Oscar Garza. Plaintiffs stated that defendants did not consent to the request, but defendants did not file opposition papers.

Plaintiffs’ counsel represented that a probate application for Garza had been filed before May 24, 2023. Counsel also reported that Garza’s probate attorney expected an attorney for an unknown heir to be appointed soon, that the estate was having difficulty locating Garza’s heirs, and that the local probate court had provided an estimated timeline of three months to three years for completing the probate case.

Legal standard

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b), the court may extend a deadline for good cause. The order applied that standard to the deadline for filing a motion to substitute a party under Rule 25.

Ruling

Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein granted a 90-day extension of the deadline, extending it to September 4, 2023. The court stated that it was unlikely to grant additional extensions because it could not wait indefinitely for an estate representative to be appointed. Any further extension request would need to include a detailed sworn statement describing all steps taken by the estate to appoint a representative.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.