Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01120/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01120-39/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CECILIA FRAHER,

Plaintiff,

v.

SURYDEVARA, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:06-cv-01120-AWI-GSA PC

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF MOTION,

WITHOUT PREJUDICE, AS MOOT

(Doc. 107) 

FIFTEEN-DAY OBJECTION PERIOD

This is a civil action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and California tort law by Plaintiff

Cecilia Fraher. On August 25, 2009, the Court held a hearing during which, in relevant part,

Plaintiff’s motion to substitute Mary Lee Gill as the successor in interest for deceased Defendant

Nancy Spaeder was discussed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a)(1). As discussed during the hearing, Plaintiff’s

counsel was to do further investigation into the proper party to substitute for Ms. Spaeder, who was

not a state employee and instead worked for a private company under contract with the California

Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. At issue was whether Mary Lee Gill was in fact the

proper party to substitute or whether Ms. Spaeder’s former employer should instead be subject to

substitution.

Subsequently, on October 16, 2009, Plaintiff filed a third amended complaint naming the

Estate of Nancy Spaeder, R.N., Sampath Suryadevara, M.D., and Mohammad Ashraf, M.D. as

defendants. A summons was issued for the Estate of Nancy Spaeder, R.N. on October 30, 2009, and

service is in process.

///

1

Case 1:06-cv-01120-AWI -MJS Document 128 Filed 01/12/10 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

The second amended complaint has been superceded by the filing of the third amended

complaint, in which the Estate of Nancy Spaeder, R.N. is named as a defendant. No evidence in the

record to the contrary and with time left for service to be effected, the Court presumes service on the

party found to be proper by Plaintiff’s counsel is pending. Plaintiff’s motion to substitute Mary Lee

Gill for Nancy Spaeder, named in the second amended complaint, has been rendered moot, and the

Court HEREBY RECOMMENDS denial of the motion, without prejudice, on that ground.

These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Any objections must

be in writing and must be filed within fifteen (15) days from the date of service of these Findings

and Recommendations. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s

Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections within the specified time maywaive the

right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 11, 2010 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

6i0kij UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 1:06-cv-01120-AWI -MJS Document 128 Filed 01/12/10 Page 2 of 2