Palladeno v. Mohr et al
| Ted Palladeno |
| Gary C Mohr, Roger Wilson, Robert Hammond, John Desmarais, Brian Wittrup, Cynthia Mausser, Ginny Lamneck, Kimberly Clipper, Kevin Jones, Donald Morgan, John Coleman, Terry Collins and John Doe 1-99 |
| 3:2018cv01352 |
| June 13, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Ohio |
| Toledo Office |
| Lucas |
| Jeffrey J. Helmick |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 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
46
Memorandum Opinion and Order: The motion to dismiss filed by Interested Party the State of Ohio, (Doc. No. 42), is granted in part and denied in part. The State of Ohio's motion to dismiss for want of prosecution, (Doc. No. 33), is denie d. All claims brought by plaintiffs other than Palladeno are dismissed for misjoinder, pursuant to Rule 20 and Rule 21. These plaintiffs are granted leave to file new complaints asserting their individual claims within 120 days of this opinion. No extensions of this deadline will be permitted without a showing of good cause. Counts 1, 4, 6-29, and 31-85, to the extent Palladeno seeks relief related to those counts, are dismissed for failure to allege harm personal to Palladeno. Counts 2, 3, 5, and 30, to the extent Palladeno asserts a claim for relief in those counts, are dismissed for failure to state a claim. re 42 33 24 . Judge Jeffrey J. Helmick on 5/6/2020. (S,AL)
|
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 Northern 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.
