Fair et al v. I.R.S. et al

Filing 106

ORDER - Upon review of the record and pleadings before the court, it is determined the requirements for Rule 25(a)(1) dismissal have been satisfied. Based upon this review, the court concludes the United States' Unopposed Motion 103 to D ismiss Case Pursuant to Rule 25(a) is GRANTED. Accordingly, Fair's Complaint 2 is DISMISSED with prejudice. All pending motions are denied as MOOT. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 4thd day of February, 2014, by United States Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta. (peg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON
PORTLAND DIVISION

STEVEN GEORGE FAIR, Sovereign in
Common article IV, Sec. 2, in Sojourn; THE
OFFICE OF PRESIDING PATRIARCH
STEVEN GEORGE FAIR AND
SUCCESSORS, a corporate sole; and THE
ORGANIC ASSEMBLY OF YAHSHUA, an
unincorporated religious society,

3:12-cv-1714-AC
ORDER

Plaintiffs,

v.
I.R.S.; BANK OF AMERICA; UNITED
STATES 28 USC 3002(15); and OFFICE OF
GOVERNOR FOR OR KITZHABER, JOHN,
Defendants.
A COSTA, Magistrate Judge:
Steven George Fair ("Fair"), appearing pro se, the Office of Presiding Patriarch Steven
George Fair, and the Organic Assembly ofYahshua, filed a Complaint against the Internal Revenue
1- ORDER

Service ("IRS") and the United States, as that term is defined in 28 U.S. C.§ 3002(15) (collectively
"United States"), Bank of America, N.A. ("BOA"), and Governor John Kitzhaber ("Governor
Kitzhaber"), alleging violations of various provisions of the United States Constitution, including
Articles I-VI and X; and state law claims for breach of contract and breach offiducimy duties. Fair
challenged the IRS's efforts to collect an outstanding tax liability assessed against him in the amount
of$280,000. Fair sought both injunctive and monetmy relief.
During the pendency of this case Fair passed away. On September 17,2013, the United
States filed a Suggestion of Death Upon the Record, pursuant to Rule 25(a)(l) of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure. Rule 25(a)(l) provides:
If a pmty dies and the claim is not extinguished, the court may order substitution of
the proper pmty. A motion for substitution may be made by any party or by the
decedent's successor or representative. If the motion is not made within 90 days after
service of a statement noting the death, the action by or against the decedent must be
dismissed.
FED. R. CIV. P. 25(a)(1). To stmt the 90-day period running under the Rule, a party must both
formally suggest the death of the party on the record, and it must serve the pmties and deceased
pmty's successor with the suggestion of death. Barlow v. Ground, 39 F.3d 231,233 (9th Cir. 1994).
Here, the successor to Steven George Fair is his estate, and the personal representative of the
estate is his son, Robert Fair. (Adam D. Strait Dec!. Ex. A, Feb. 4, 2014.) Robett Fairis represented
with respect to estate matters by Ryan Haan. (Strait Dec!. Ex. B.) Haan agreed to accept service of
the Suggestion of Death on his client's behalf. (Strait Dec!. Ex. B.) Haan was personally served
with the Suggestion of Death on October 24, 2013. (Strait Dec!. Ex. C.)
More than 90 days have elapsed since Haan was served, and Robert Fair has not filed a
motion for substitution. In fact, Haan expressly indicated Robert Fair did not intend to file such a

2-0RDER

1

motion (Strait Dec!. Ex. B). Accordingly, the United States filed an Unopposed Joint Motion to
Dismiss Case Pursuant to Rule 25(a), requesting dismissal of all claims asserted by Fair against all
defendants.
Upon a review of the record and pleadings before the court, it is detetmined the requirements
for a Rule 25(a)(l) dismissal have been satisfied. Based upon this review, the court concludes the
United States' Unopposed Joint Motion to Dismiss Case Pursuant to Rule 25(a) (doc.# 103) is
GRANTED. Accordingly, Fair's Complaint (doc. #2) is DISMISSED, with prejudice. All pending
motions are denied as MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED

-<.l!.l

Dated this(daYofFebruary 2014

(·.·~vd,CJc
John V. Acosta
United States Magistrate Judge
'

3-0RDER

)