Antipova v. CareMount Medical P.C.
- John Cronan
- 1:21-cv-07453
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Antipova v. CareMount Medical, Magistrate Judge Moses vacated deadlines after Antipova’s death and required notice before possible dismissal.
Yelena Antipova’s estate, executor, representative, or any other proper party who may seek substitution, as well as the defendants and the pending action.
What happened
In Antipova v. CareMount Medical P.C., the defendants informed the court that plaintiff Yelena Antipova had died in January 2024. Antipova had been representing herself. The case had pending deadlines before the court.
The court explained that a proper party or representative may ask to be substituted for a deceased party. If no substitution request is made within 90 days after formal notice of the death, the action must be dismissed under the federal civil rules.
Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses vacated all pending pretrial deadlines and ordered the defendants to mail the order to Antipova or her executor or representative at her last-known residential address. The defendants must file proof of service. If no substitution motion is filed within 90 days, the court will consider a motion to dismiss; the court did not dismiss the action in this order.
The detailed version
- Antipova v. CareMount Medical P.C. · No. 1:21-cv-07453
- John Cronan
- Feb. 14, 2024
Background
Defendants advised the court that pro se plaintiff Yelena Antipova had died in January 2024. The opinion states that the defendants notified the court by letter. The case had pending pretrial deadlines.
Substitution After Death
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a) permits a party, or the deceased party’s successor or representative, to ask the court to substitute the proper party. The request must be made within 90 days after service of a statement formally noting the death. If no motion for substitution is made within that period, the action against or by the deceased party must be dismissed.
Court’s Action
The court vacated all pending pretrial deadlines. It directed the defendants to serve a copy of the order by first-class mail, addressed to “Yelena Antipova or her executor or representative,” at her last-known residential address, and to file proof of service on the docket. The court stated that, if no substitution motion is made within 90 days after service, it will consider a motion to dismiss. The order did not itself dismiss the action.
Disposition
The order vacated the pending pretrial deadlines and directed service of the order. It did not rule on the underlying claims or grant or deny a motion to dismiss.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.