Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01671/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01671-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

MICHAEL C. WANLESS, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

MICHELE DITOMAS, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:16-cv-1671-EFB P 

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS 

This action was opened on June 21, 2016, in the United States District Court for the 

Northern District of California, when plaintiff’s mother mailed to the court her son’s prisoner 

civil rights complaint, dated June 7, 2016. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff’s mother subsequently filed a 

letter informing the court that her son had died on June 13, 2016, and that prior to his death, he 

had asked her to file the complaint on his behalf. ECF No. 3. Because plaintiff died prior to 

commencing this action, it was “void at its inception” and must be dismissed. Banakus v. United 

Aircraft Corp., 290 F. Supp. 259 (S.D.N.Y. 1968). See also Adelsberger v. United States, 58 Fed. 

Cl. 616, 618 (Fed. Cl. 2003) (where a plaintiff dies prior to filing suit, there is no proper plaintiff 

and the action before the court is a nullity); Destacio v. A-C Prods. Liab. Trust (In re Asbestos 

Prods. Liab. Litig.), 311 F.R.D. 152, 156 (E.D. Pa. 2015) (citing cases for the same proposition). 

///// 

///// 

Case 2:16-cv-01671-TLN-EFB Document 7 Filed 08/11/16 Page 1 of 2
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 

1. The Clerk of the Court is directed to serve a copy of this order on plaintiff’s mother, 

Barbara Wanless, 7118 The Terrace, Anderson, California, 96007. 

2. The Clerk of the Court shall randomly assign a United States District Judge to this 

action. 

Further, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this case be closed. 

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

DATED: August 11, 2016. 

Case 2:16-cv-01671-TLN-EFB Document 7 Filed 08/11/16 Page 2 of 2