Alexander v. Edwards et al
| Justin A. Alexander |
| Keith Alan Edwards, Sheriff Matt Lutz, David C Suciu, Ronald Welch, John F. Litle and Kelly J. Cottrill |
| 2:2025cv01168 |
| October 7, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Kimberly A Jolson |
| Michael H Watson |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 17, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 15 CLERK'S JUDGMENT - Pursuant to the March 17, 2026 Order, the Court ADOPTS the R&R without conducting a de novo review. (jk) (This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.) |
Filing 14
ORDER - The Court ADOPTS the R&R without conducting a de novo review. The Court DISMISSES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff's claims challenging the validity of the criminal prosecutions pending against him and Plaintiff's state-law, attorney-malpractice claim. The Court DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE the remaining claims. As such, Plaintiff's motion for default judgment, ECF No. 8, is DENIED, and Defendants' motions to dismiss, ECF Nos. 3, 4, are GRANTED. The Court CERTIFIES pursuant to 28 U. S.C. 1915(a)(3) that an appeal of this Order would not be taken in good faith and that Plaintiff should not be permitted to appeal in forma pauperis. Signed by Judge Michael H. Watson on 3/17/2026. (jk) (This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
| Filing 13 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: It is RECOMMENDED that the Court DISMISS without prejudice Plaintiff's claims challenging the validity of the criminal prosecutions pending against him and Plaintiff's state-law attorney malpractice claim; DISMISS the remaining claims with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B) & 1915A(b); GRANT the motions to dismiss by Defendant Kelly J. Cottrill (Doc. #3 ) and by Defendants John F. Litle, Matt Lutz, David Suciu, and Ronald Welch (Doc. #4 ); and DENY Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment against Defendant Edwards (Doc. #8 ). The Court also DENIES without prejudice Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel (Doc. #10 ). Objections to R&R due by 2/23/2026. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson on 2/9/2026. (kk2)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification) |
|
ORDER denying #10 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson on 2/9/2026. (This entry is for statistical purposes only. Please see ECF No. #13 for document). (kk2)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification)
|
| Filing 12 REPLY to Response to Motion re #3 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Defendant Kelly J. Cottrill. (Downey, Daniel) |
| Filing 11 REPLY to Response to Motion re #4 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Defendants John F. Litle, Matt Lutz, David C Suciu, Ronald Welch. (Yosowitz, Andrew) |
| Filing 10 Supplemental Memorandum in Opposition to #3 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM and Interlineation for Appointment of Counsel by Plaintiff Justin A. Alexander. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Michele Lang) (er) |
| Filing 9 RESPONSE in Opposition to #3 & #4 MOTIONS TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Plaintiff Justin A. Alexander. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B) (er) |
| Filing 8 MOTION for Default Judgment against Keith Edwards by Plaintiff Justin A. Alexander. (er) |
|
Filing 7
NOTATION ORDER - The Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time (Doc. #6 ). Plaintiff's responses to the pending Motions to Dismiss (Docs. #3 , #4 ) are due on or before December 18, 2025. The Court will grant no further extensions to these deadlines. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kimberly A. Jolson on 11/20/25. (jr)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
| Filing 6 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response to #3 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Plaintiff Justin A. Alexander. (er) |
| Filing 5 State Court Record received from the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas Clerk. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (er) |
| Filing 4 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendants John F. Litle, Matt Lutz, David C Suciu, Ronald Welch. (Yosowitz, Andrew) |
| Filing 3 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM by Defendant Kelly J. Cottrill. (Downey, Daniel) |
| Filing 2 COMPLAINT with JURY DEMAND filed originally in Franklin County CCP on 9/9/2025 by Justin A. Alexander against Kelly J. Cottrill, Keith Alan Edwards, John F. Litle, Matt Lutz, David C Suciu & Ronald Welch. (er) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL from Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, case number 25CV007717 ( Filing fee $ 405 paid - receipt number: AOHSDC-10717118), filed by John F. Litle, David C Suciu, Matt Lutz, Ronald Welch. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Supplemental Civil Cover Sheet Supplemental Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Exhibit State Court Complaint, #4 Exhibit State Cpurt Notice of Removal, #5 Exhibit State Court Summonses, #6 Exhibit State Court Requests for Service) (Yosowitz, Andrew) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
