Howard v. Montgomery County et al
| James J Howard |
| Montgomery County, Naphcare, Ms. Theresa, Ms. Vallery, Jane Doe #1 and John/ Jane Doe x 25 |
| 3:2016cv00517 |
| December 27, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Dayton Office |
| MONTGOMERY |
| Michael R. Merz |
| Thomas M. Rose |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
79
ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS 76 ; ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 71 ; GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT [50, 52]; DISMISSING THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 49 ; AND TERMINATING THIS CASE. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 8-13-2018. (de)
|
|
Filing
71
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION1 THAT: (1) DEFENDANTS MOTIONS TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOCS. 50, 52) BE GRANTED; (2) PLAINTIFFS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. 49) BE DISMISSED; AND (3) THIS CASE BE TERMINATED ON THE COURTS DOCKET. Objections to R&R due by 7/2/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman on 6/18/18. (kma)
|
|
Filing
48
AGREED ORDER ALLOWING PLAINTIFF TO FILE HIS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT WITH A JURY DEMAND. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 2-20-2018. (de)
|
|
Filing
47
ENTRY AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S RENEWED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE HIS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT 43 AND TERMINATING MOTION TO DISMISS 13 AND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 28 AS MOOT. Plaintiff Howard shall file his Second Amended Complaint within 7 days from the date of this Order. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 2-15-2018. (de)
|
|
Filing
44
ENTRY AND ORDER SETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE ON PLAINTIFF'S RENEWED MOTION TO FILE HIS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. 43 ) : The Court hereby ORDERS Defendants to respond to the Motion for Leave by no later than February 7, 2018. Plaintiff's reply, if any, must be filed within 3 business days of Defendants' response.. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 2/1/18. (ep)
|
|
Filing
28
DECISION AND ORDER ON MOTION TO CLARIFY; REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - To clarify the record, there are no John or Jane Does presently named as Defendants and the Summonses purportedly served on them are QUASHED. It is respectfully recommended that the Amended Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and it should be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE on that basis. Objections to R&R due by 6/5/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 5/22/2017. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Ohio Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
