Joksch

(PC) Elder v. Joksch

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 6, 20232:16-cv-01925California341 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 COREY JEROME ELDER, No. 2:16-CV-1925-DJC-DMC-P Plaintiff, v. ORDER JOKSCH, Defendant. 16 Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion, ECF No. 79, for substitution of parties. Plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel, ECF No. 80, will be addressed separately. On January 24, 2023, counsel for Defendant Joksch, who is the sole remaining defendant in this action, filed a notice of Defendant’s death. See ECF No. 71. Plaintiff now seeks leave to substitute “Defendant C. Joksch’s estate” for Defendant. ECF No. 79. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(a)(a), a party moving to substitute “must provide evidence that the party to be substituted is the successor-in-interest or legal representative of the decedent.” F.T.C. v. AMG Servs., Inc., 2014 WL 2742872 (D. Nev. 2014). A “proper party” is the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.