Leo v. New York State Department of Health et al

Filing 61

DECISION AND ORDER: Plaintiff's # 9 Amended Complaint is DISMISSED pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.25(a). Signed by Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 5-17-2010. (mae)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK MARK LEO Plaintiff, -vsNEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, ONONDAGA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES, DAVID SUTKOWY, ONONDAGA COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF LONG TERM CARE SERVICES, ROBERTA A. SPRAGUE, and RICHARD F. DAINES Defendants. Legal Services of Central New York Counsel for Plaintiff 472 South Salina Street Suite 300 Syracuse, NY 13202 Andrew M. Cuomo, Attorney General of the State of New York Counsel for Defendants 144 Exchange Blvd , Suite 200 Rochester, NY 14614 Julie B. Morse, Esq. Civil Case No.5:06-cv-1530 (GTS/ATB)

Emil J. Bove, Esq., AAG

HON. GLENN T. SUDDABY, United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER On April 5, 2007, Mark Leo ("Plaintiff") filed an Amended Complaint in this civil rights action, asserting claims against the New York State Department of Health, Onondaga County Department of Social Services, David Sutkowy, Onondaga County Department of Long Term Care Services, Roberta A. Sprague, and Richard F. Daines. ("Defendants"). (Dkt. No. 9.) On April 24, 2007 and April 30, 2007, New York State Department of Health, Onondaga County Department of Social Services, David

Sutkowy, Onondaga County Department of Long Term Care Services, Roberta A. Sprague, and Richard F. Daines appeared in this action by filing their Answers to the Amended Complaint. (Dkt. Nos. 21 & 24.) On January 22, 2010, Defendants' counsel filed a suggestion of death pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25, advising the Court that Plaintiff passed away on December 30, 2009. (Dkt. No. 56.) On February 12, 2010, Defendants' counsel served the suggestion of death on Steve Leo, Plaintiff's next of kin, by first class mail. (Dkt. No. 60.) As of the date of this Decision and Order, no party or successor or representative of Plaintiff has made a motion for substitution, or requested an extension of the deadline by which to file such a motion. ACCORDINGLY, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Dkt No. 9) is DISMISSED pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 25(a). The Clerk is directed to enter Judgment in favor of Defendants and close this action. Dated: May 17, 2010 Syracuse, NY