Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01484/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cv-01484-24/pdf.json

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

---

1

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

On October 29, 2015, the Court ordered Plaintiffs to “file a notice of death related to the 

deceased plaintiff. The notice of death SHALL be served on any known heirs and successors of the 

deceased plaintiff.” (Doc. 82 at 1) When this did not occur, the Court ordered Plaintiffs to show 

cause why sanctions should not be imposed for their failure to comply with the Court’s orders. (Doc. 

84) In response, apparently, Plaintiffs filed a copy of correspondence between counsel and Estella 

Madueno, who is the mother of Juan Zavala who died during the pendency of this action. (Doc. 85) 

However, the Court, once again, noted that this letter did not comply with the Court’s order and 

required Plaintiffs to file a “notice of death” in pleading form and served on Juan Zavala’s heirs. 

(Doc. 86) 

Now, Plaintiffs have filed a document titled, “Notice of Potential Right of Substitution for 

Decedent Juan Zavala.” (Doc. 87) While now formatted as a pleading, the notice seems to be directed 

only to Estella Madueno. Id. at 1. Notably, however, a notice of death is required to be filed on the 

DUBRIN et al.,

 Plaintiffs,

v.

MICHAEL STAINER, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:11-cv-01484 AWI JLT 

ORDER CONSTRUING “NOTICE OF 

POTENTIAL SUBSTITUTION OF RIGHTS” AS A 

NOTICE OF DEATH; ORDER REQUIRING 

PLAINTIFFS TO FILE PROOF OF PERSONAL 

SERVICE ON THE DECEDENT’S HEIRS

Case 1:11-cv-01484-DAD-JLT Document 88 Filed 11/16/15 Page 1 of 2
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

record and is required to give formal notice to parties and non-parties of the death of a party. Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 25(a)(3). However, the Court will construe the “notice” filed by Plaintiffs as notice directed 

also to Defendants of the death of Plaintiff, Juan Zavala.1 The Court will serve this order

electronically to Defendants to accomplish the spirit of Rule 25.

On the other hand, along with the “notice,” Plaintiffs filed proof of service to Ms. Maduena by 

first class mail. (Doc. 87 at 3) Notably, however, Rule 25 requires personal service on non-parties. 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a)(3) [“A motion to substitute, together with a notice of hearing, must be served on 

the parties as provided in Rule 5 and on nonparties as provided in Rule 4

2

. A statement noting death 

must be served in the same manner.” Emphasis added.] Thus, the service by mail is ineffective.

Therefore, no later than November 30, 2015, Plaintiffs SHALL file proof of personal service

of the notice of death on all heirs and successors of Juan Zavala.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 16, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

1 The “notice of death”—which is often referred to as a “suggestion of death”—should note the date of the decedent’s 

death in order to accomplish its goal.

2

Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(e) requires service “to the individual personally.” Emphasis added.

Case 1:11-cv-01484-DAD-JLT Document 88 Filed 11/16/15 Page 2 of 2