Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_02-cv-02745/USCOURTS-cand-3_02-cv-02745-12/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 Plaintiff’s attorney’s filing of the notice to this Court was improper because it was

not filed by a party or by a successor or representative of the deceased party. See

Fehrenbacher v. Quackenbush, 759 F. Supp. 1516, 1518 (D. Kan. 1991) (quoting Charles A.

Wright et al., Federal Practice and Procedure § 1955 at 545 (2d ed. 1986)) (“The attorney for

the deceased party may not make the suggestion of death since he is not himself a party to

the action and, since his authority to represent the deceased terminated on the death, he is not

a ‘representative of the deceased party’ of the sort contemplated by the rule.”); Rende v. Kay, 415 F.2d 983, 985 (D.C. Cir. 1969) (holding that “[a]lthough the attorney for the defendant

was retained to ‘represent’ the deceased as his counsel, he is not a person who could be made

a party, and is not a ‘representative of the deceased party’ in the sense contemplated by Rule

25(a)(1)”). 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JUNIOR WILLIAMS,

Plaintiff,

 v.

DALY CITY POLICE OFFICERS C.

AUSTRIA and M. PRICE,

Defendants. /

No. C 02-02745 JSW

ORDER VACATING DATES AND

SETTING CASE MANAGEMENT

CONFERENCE

On May 2, 2006, the Court received notice of Plaintiff’s death by a suggestion of death

filed by Plaintiff’s attorney pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a)(1).1

There are several upcoming dates on this matter, including: (1) Plaintiff’s motion to

amend the complaint set for hearing on May 12, 2006, at 9:00 a.m. (for which no reply has been

filed); (2) a pretrial conference set for May 22, 2006 at 2:00 p.m.; and (3) a jury trial set to

commence on June 19, 2006 at 8:30 a.m. In light of Plaintiff’s death, the Court HEREBY

VACATES all three dates. The Court will, however, conduct a further case management

conference on May 12, 2006 at 9:00 a.m. to address whether this case will proceed and, if so,

who may be substituted in as the proper party. 

Case 3:02-cv-02745-JSW Document 131 Filed 05/04/06 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Should the case proceed, the parties should be prepared to discuss the setting of

expedited dates for: (1) briefing and a hearing on a motion to substitute; (2) a hearing on

Plaintiff’s pending motion to amend; (3) the pretrial conference; and (4) the jury trial. Due to

the circumstances, the parties shall have until Wednesday, May 10, 2006 to submit a joint case

management conference statement.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 3, 2006 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

by Honorable Martin J. Jenkins

Case 3:02-cv-02745-JSW Document 131 Filed 05/04/06 Page 2 of 2