Citation Codes Equivalent Citations citation codes Docket Number No. C01-5217L. Judges Robert S. Lasnik See more information ... Smart Summary Please sign up to generate summary. WILLIAM LEE WRIGHT, et al., Plaintiffs, v. THE FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER, et al., Defendants. ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AGAINST PLAINTIFFS COUCH AND FISHER ROBERT S. LASNIK, United States District Judge This matter comes before the Court on the "Hutchinson Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment Against Plaintiffs Couch, Fisher and Ridings." Defendants argue that, because plaintiffs Couch and Fisher were not duly appointed as the representatives of their wives' estates prior to January 23, 2002, their wrongful death and survivorship claims must be dismissed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 17(a). As acknowledged by defendants, the "modern function of the rule is `to protect the defendant against a subsequent action by a party actually entitled to recover, and to insure generally that the judgment will have its proper effect as res judicata.'" Sorague v. Sysco Corp., 97 Wn. App. 169, 172 (1999) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 17(a) Advisory Conirnittee's Note to 1966 Amendment),review denied, 140 Wn.2d 1004 (2000). Such potential problems have been overcome by the recent appointment of plaintiffs Couch and Fisher as the personal representatives of their wives' estates. Contrary to defendants' argument in reply, the timing of their appointment was reasonable in the circumstances presented here. Defendants have withdrawn their motion for sunnnaiy judgment against plaintiff Ridings. Reply at 1 n. 1. The Court has not considered, and offers no opinion on, the effect plaintiffs' recent appointment as personal representatives may have on the statute of limitations analysis. For all of the foregoing reasons, defendants' motion for summary judgment against plaintiffs Couch and Fisher is DENIED.