Jones et al v. Montgomery County Department of Job and Family Services - Children Services Division et al
| Jewell Evette Jones and Edward Levi Jones |
| Montgomery County Department of Job and Family Services - Children Services Division, Tom Kelly, Jane Hay, Ronald Church, Jewell Good, Deansai Myers, Michelle Matthews, Debby Shaw and Sandra Mundy |
| 3:2018cv00037 |
| February 1, 2018 |
| U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Dayton Office |
| MONTGOMERY |
| Sharon L. Ovington |
| Walter H. Rice |
| Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
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
77
ORDER DISMISSING CASE; TERMINATION ENTRY Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 3/17/2022. (bjr)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
62
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING IN PART AND REJECTING IN PART THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (DOC. # 57 ); SUSTAINING THE OBJECTIONS OF DEFENDANTS MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF JOB AND FAMILY SERVICES, CHILDREN SER VICES DIVISION; JEWELL GOOD; DEBBY SHAW; SANDRA MUNDY AND DEANSAI MYERS (MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEFENDANTS) AND JANE HAY (DOC. # 59 ); OVERRULING THE SEPARATE OBJECTIONS OF JANE HAY (DOC. # 58 ); DEFENDANTS TOM KELLEY, MICHELLE MATTHEWS AND RONALD CHURCH DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF JOB AND FAMILY SERVICES, CHILDREN SERVICES DIVISION DISMISSED AS NOT SUI JURIS AND MONTGOMERY COUNTY SUBSTITUTED AS DEFENDANT; SUSTAINING THE MOTION TO DISMISS OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEFENDAN TS AND JANE HAY (DOC. # 37 ); AND SUSTAINING IN PART AND OVERRULING IN PART THE SEPARATE MOTION TO DISMISS OF DEFENDANT JANE HAY (DOC. # 38 )- For the reasons set forth above, the Court ADOPTS, in part, and REJECTS, in part, the Report and Recommenda tions, Doc. #57, SUSTAINS the Objections of the Montgomery County Defendants and Hay, Doc. #59, OVERRULES the separate Objections of Hay, Doc. #58, SUSTAINS, the Motion to Dismiss of the Montgomery County Defendants and Hay, Doc. #37, and OVERRULES I N PART AND SUSTAINS IN PART the separate Motion to Dismiss of Hay, Doc. #38.12MCDJFS is stricken from the Amended Complaint as Plaintiffs employer and Montgomery County is substituted as the employer and a Defendant in this litigation. Defendant, Dea nsai Myers, is dismissed as a Defendant. Defendant, Ronald Church, named in the prayer for relief, is dismissed and John Doe is substituted as a Defendant.As a result of this Decision and Entry, Plaintiffs Amended Complaint alleges Title VII claims o f race-based hostile work environment in Count I and retaliation based on racial discrimination and harassment in Count II. The only Defendant in this litigation is Plaintiffs employer, Montgomery County.. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 4/29/2020. (kma)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
57
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION1 THAT: (1) DEFENDANTS MOTIONS TO DISMISS (DOCS. 37 , 38 ) BE GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; (2) AND THIS CASE REMAIN PENDING ON THE COURTS DOCKET WITH REGARD TO PLAINTIFFS OFFICIAL CAPACITY TITLE VII CLAIMS ALLEGING R ACE DISCRIMINATION AND RETALIATION. Objections to R&R due by 2/18/2020. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman on 2/3/2020. (kma)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
33
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. # 29 ) IN PART AND DECLARING SAME MOOT IN PART;PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT (DOC. # 20 ) SUSTAINED; PLAINTIFF TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT WITHIN TWENTY DAYS FROM DA TE; DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS TO DISMISS, PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. P. 12(b)(6) (DOC. # 12 AND # 13 ) OVERRULED AS ULTIMATELY MOOT, WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO REFILING ONCE PLAINTIFF FILES HER AMENDED COMPLAINT; DEFENDANTS' MOTIONS AND SUPPLEMENTAL MOTI ONS TO STAY DISCOVERY (DOC. # 16 , # 17 AND # 21 ) OVERRULED AS MOOT; DEFENDANTS' FIRST MOTION FOR SCHEDULING CONFERENCE (DOC. # 28 ) BEFORE MAGISTRATE JUDGE SHARON L. OVINGTON GRANTED. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 3/22/2019. (srb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
29
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS- IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT: 1. Montgomery County Defendants Motion to Dismiss under Fed. R. 12(b)(6) (Doc. # 12 ) be GRANTED, in part, and Plaintiffs claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1981a be dismissed;2. Montgomery Coun ty Defendants Motion to Dismiss under Fed. R. 12(b)(6) (Doc. # 12 ) be DENIED in remaining part; 3. Defendant Hays Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 13 ) be GRANTED, in part, and Plaintiffs claim against her under 42 U.S.C. § 1981a be dismissed; 4. Defe ndant Hays Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 13 ) be DENIED in remaining part; 5. Plaintiffs Motion to Amend Complaint (Doc. # 20 ) be GRANTED, and Plaintiff be directed to file her First Amended Complaint within 20 days of a Decision addressing this Report and Recommendations; 6. Defendants Motions and Supplemental Motions to Stay Discovery (Doc. #s 16 , 17 , 21 ) be DENIED as moot; and 7. Defendants Motion for Scheduling Conference (Doc. # 28 ) be GRANTED and a Scheduling Conference be set after a Decision addressing this Report and Recommendations. December 10, 2018. Objections to R&R due by 12/24/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington on 12/10/18. (kma)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing
3
ORDER - Accordingly, Plaintiffs Complaint is not subject to dismissal under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:1. The United States Marshals Office is ORDERED to effect service uponDefendant, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)( 3), once it receives the required forms from the Clerk of Court. All costs of service shall be advanced by the United States. 2. Plaintiff must serve each named Defendantor his or her attorney in the event the attorneys appearance is entered in the r ecordwith a copy of every document submitted for consideration by the Court. Plaintiff shall include with the original paper to be filed with the Clerk of Court a certificate stating the date and a true and correct copy of any document mailed to the Defendants or their attorneys. Any paper received by a District Judge or Magistrate Judge that has not been filed with the Clerk of Court or that fails to include a certificate of service will be disregarded by the Court.3. Plaintiff must inform the Clerk of Court promptly of any changes of address she has during the pendency of this lawsuit. Failure to do so may result in dismissal of this case for failure to prosecute. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington on 2/16/18. (kma)(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 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.
