Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alsd-1_15-cv-00344/USCOURTS-alsd-1_15-cv-00344-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 446
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities Act - Other
Cause of Action: 29:754 Discrimination

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

WANDA RANDOLPH, et al., )

 )

Plaintiffs, )

 )

v. ) CIVIL ACTION 15-0344-WS-N

 )

JL HOLDINGS I, LLC, et al., ) 

 )

Defendants. )

 ORDER

This action was brought by Wanda Randolph and Dennis Dragotta. 

Randolph has filed a motion to dismiss the action with prejudice, (Doc. 26), to 

which the defendants consent. (Doc. 30). 

Mr. Dragotta died on October 26, 2015. (Doc. 25). Defense counsel state 

they reached a settlement with Plaintiffs’ counsel before they knew of his death. 

(Doc. 30). Mr. Dragotta’s widow states that he left no will or assets requiring 

probating, that she does not intend to probate the estate or seek letters of 

representation, and that his relatives have not contested her decision or disputed 

that she is authorized to speak for the estate. She asserts that the defendants 

“ha[ve] agreed to very substantial repairs” and that, “as far as Dennis Dragotta is 

concerned,” the case “is concluded other than the Court dismissing it,” which she 

urges the Court to do. (Doc. 29).

The Court requested plaintiffs’ counsel to provide “a statement from an 

authorized representative of the estate: (1) establishing his or her authority to 

speak for the estate and the basis of such authority; and (2) stating the estate’s 

intentions as to pursuit of this litigation.” (Doc. 28). The plaintiffs responded 

with Mrs. Dragotta’s affidavit. For lack of legal briefing from counsel, the Court 

Case 1:15-cv-00344-WS-N Document 31 Filed 12/22/15 Page 1 of 2
2

is unable to conclude from her affidavit that Mrs. Dragotta has lawful authority to 

bind the estate to a dismissal of the action. 

The suggestion of death was filed and served October 30, 2015. (Doc. 25). 

“If the motion [for substitution] is not made within 90 days after service of a 

statement noting the death, the action by or against the decedent must be 

dismissed.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a)(1). Failing a request for substitution, then, this 

action as to Mr. Dragotta will be ripe for dismissal on or about January 29, 2016. 

The Court deems it the prudent course to retain this action as to Mr. Dragotta until 

that date; if no motion for substitution is made by January 28, 2016, the Court will 

dismiss the action as to him pursuant to Rule 25.

For the reasons set forth above, Ms. Randolph’s motion to dismiss is 

granted in part. This action as to Ms. Randolph is dismissed with prejudice. 

To the extent it seeks dismissal of the action as to Mr. Dragotta, the motion is 

denied. This action as to Mr. Dragotta is stayed (other than for purposes of filing 

a motion for substitution) until further order of the Court.

 

DONE and ORDERED this 22nd day of December, 2015.

s/ WILLIAM H. STEELE

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 1:15-cv-00344-WS-N Document 31 Filed 12/22/15 Page 2 of 2