Klein, et al v. Tatum, et al

Filing 245

ORDERS: plaintiff's 243 motion to substitute is considered to be his response to the defendant's 224 motion for summary judgment, plaintiff's motion to stay 244 is moot, defendant Greyhound Lines shall respond to the plaintiff� 39;s motion to substitute 243 on or before December 16, 2013, and defendant Greyhound Lines' reply in support of its 224 motion for summary judgment shall be filed on or before December 16, 2013, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 11/20/2013.(rpmcd)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Senior District Judge Richard P. Matsch
Civil Action No. 02-cv-01827-RPM-LTM
TIBERIU KLEIN, individually and as
Executor of the Estate of CLAUDIA ZVUNCA,
Plaintiff,
v.
WESLEY JAY TATUM and
GREYHOUND LINES, INC.,
Defendants.

ORDERS

On August 15, 2013, defendant Greyhound Lines, Inc. moved for summary judgment of
dismissal, arguing that Tiberiu Klien lacks authority under Illinois law to prosecute this action as
executor of the Estate of Claudia Zvunca. (#224). Presently, the plaintiff’s response to that
motion is due on November 21, 2013.
On November 19, 2013, Klein filed a motion (#243), which includes several requests.
First, Klein asks that the Court modify its previous orders regarding the applicability of Illinois
law. That request is rejected.
Alternatively, Klein moves pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 17 to substitute himself as the
Administrator of the Estate of Claudia Zvunca. Klein states that he has been appointed as the
successor administrator of the Estate of Claudia Zvunca, upon the withdrawal of the former
administrator, F. John Cushing III. As evidence of that status, Klein submitted a certified copy

-1-

of orders of the Probate Division of the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, dated November
18, 2013.
Klein also moved for a stay (#244), requesting that briefing on the defendant’s motion for
summary judgment be stayed until after the court rules on his motion to substitute. In the
alternative, he requests a 28-day extension of time to respond to the defendant’s motion for
summary judgment.
Upon consideration of these motions, it is
ORDERED that the plaintiff’s motion to substitute is considered to be his response to the
defendant’s motion for summary judgment; it is
FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff’s motion to stay (#244) is moot, and it is
FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Greyhound Lines shall respond to the plaintiff’s
motion to substitute (#243) on or before December 16, 2013, and it is
FURTHER ORDERED that defendant Greyhound Lines’ reply in support of its motion
for summary judgment shall be filed on or before December16, 2013.
Dated: November 20, 2013
BY THE COURT:
s/Richard P. Matsch

Richard P. Matsch, Senior District Judge

-2-