Hansen v. Nevada Department of Corrections et al

Filing 16

ORDER that the Court dismisses this case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a)(1); Clerk directed to enter judgment. Signed by Judge Miranda M. Du on 1/16/2019. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - LH)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA *** 8 9 LARRY HANSEN Plaintiff, 10 ORDER v. 11 12 Case No. 3:17-cv-00387-MMD-WGC NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 On March 6, 2014, Plaintiff, then a prisoner in the custody of the Nevada 16 Department of Corrections (“NDOC”), initiated this prisoner civil rights action pursuant to 17 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 8.) On July 5, 2018, this Court issued a screening order and 18 stayed the case to give the parties an opportunity to settle their dispute. (ECF No. 3.) On 19 August 30, 2018, Defendants filed a suggestion of death on the record, informing the Court 20 that Mr. Hansen had died on August 28, 2018. (ECF No. 12.) 21 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a)(1), “[i]f a party dies and the claim 22 is not extinguished, the court may order substitution of the proper party. A motion for 23 substitution may be made by any party or by the decedent’s successor or representative. 24 If the motion is not made within 90 days after service of a statement noting the death, the 25 action by or against the decedent must be dismissed.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a)(1). The 90-day period has passed and there has been no motion for substitution. (See 26 27 ECF No. 15.) Therefore, the Court dismisses the case. 28 /// 1 2 For the foregoing reasons, it is ordered that the Court dismisses this case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a)(1). 3 It is further ordered that the Clerk of the Court enter judgment accordingly. 4 DATED THIS 16th day of January 2019. 5 MIRANDA M. DU UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?