Simmons v. Dodson et al
Filing
64
(VACATED) MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to substitute parties [ECF No. 61] is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Danny Dodson is DISMISSED from this action. An Order of Partial Dismissal will be filed separately. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 8/11/2015. (JMC) Modified on 8/11/2015 (JMC).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION
RICHARD L. SIMMONS,
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
v.
DANNY DODSON, et al.,
Defendants,
No. 1:14CV167 ACL
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s motion to substitute party. On May 5, 2015,
defendant Janet Warren filed a suggestion of death concerning defendant Danny Dodson, who
was formerly a medical officer for the Pemiscot County Jail (the “Jail”). Under Rule 25(a)(1) of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, plaintiff had ninety days to file an appropriate motion to
substitute party. On July 20, 2015, plaintiff moved to substitute Thomas Greenwell, the Sheriff
of Pemiscot County, for Dodson. Plaintiff contends, without any evidence or legal authority, that
Greenwell is Dodson’s proper successor.
Defendant argues that Greenwell is not the lawful successor under Missouri law because
he has not been appointed as Dodson’s personal representative.
The only connection between Dodson and Greenwell appears to be that Greenwell
supervised the Jail, where Dodson worked. Greenwell is not an interested party, and substitution
under Rule 25 is not proper.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to substitute parties [ECF No. 61] is
DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Danny Dodson is DISMISSED from this action.
An Order of Partial Dismissal will be filed separately.
Dated this 11th day of August, 2015.
STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?