A.S. v. Black River Local School District

N.D. Ohio

A.S. v. Black River Local School District

DecidedSeptember 18, 2024

Docket1:24-cv-00756

StatusUnknown

This text of A.S. v. Black River Local School District (A.S. v. Black River Local School District) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

A.S. v. Black River Local School District, (N.D. Ohio 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

A.S., as parent and guardian of ) Case No. 1:24-cv-00756 JANE DOE, a minor, ) ) Judge J. Philip Calabrese Plaintiff, ) ) Magistrate Judge v. ) Jonathan D. Greenberg ) MAPLETON LOCAL SCHOOL ) DISTRICT, et al., ) ) Defendant. ) )

AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER On July 15, 2024, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of all counts against Defendant Mapleton Local School District. (ECF No. 14.) On September 13, 2024, Plaintiff filed a second notice of voluntary dismissal of all counts against Defendants Mapleton Local School District Board of Education, Scott Smith, and Corey Kline. (ECF No. 17.) On September 18, 2024, Plaintiff filed a notice dismissing these Defendants with prejudice. Although Plaintiff filed these notices pursuant to Rule 41, Rule 41 applies to actions, not individual claims or parties. Therefore, the Court treats the notices as motions under Rule 21. Rule 21 provides that “[o]n motion or on its own, the court may at any time, on just terms, add or drop a party.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 21. Unless the parties agree otherwise, the Court generally drops a party under Rule 21 without prejudice. See Michaels Bldg. Co. v. Ameritrust Co. N.A., 848 F.2d 674, 682 (6th Cir. 1988). Dismissal of a party under Rule 21 is committed to the sound discretion of the district court. Hiller v. HSBC Fin. Corp., 589 F. App’x 320, 321 (6th Cir. 2015) (per curiam) (citing Sutherland v. Michigan Dept of Treasury, 344 F.3d 6038, 612 (6th Cir. 2003)). Based on the Court’s review of the record, the Court sees no reason not to dismiss these defendants at this early stage of the proceedings. Further, no person has objected to their dismissal. Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Plaintiffs claims against Defendants Mapleton Local School District, Mapleton Local School District Board of Education, Scott Smith, and Corey Kline and drops these parties from this litigation. Plaintiff shall bear her own costs and attorneys’ fees with respect to the parties dropped. SO ORDERED. Dated: September 18, 2024

J.PhilipCalabrese United States District Judge Northern District of Ohio

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

A.S., as parent and guardian of ) Case No. 1:24-cv-00756 JANE DOE, a minor, ) ) Judge J. Philip Calabrese Plaintiff, ) ) Magistrate Judge v. ) Jonathan D. Greenberg ) MAPLETON LOCAL SCHOOL ) DISTRICT, et al., ) ) Defendant. ) )

AMENDED OPINION AND ORDER On July 15, 2024, Plaintiff filed a notice of voluntary dismissal of all counts against Defendant Mapleton Local School District. (ECF No. 14.) On September 13, 2024, Plaintiff filed a second notice of voluntary dismissal of all counts against Defendants Mapleton Local School District Board of Education, Scott Smith, and Corey Kline. (ECF No. 17.) On September 18, 2024, Plaintiff filed a notice dismissing these Defendants with prejudice. Although Plaintiff filed these notices pursuant to Rule 41, Rule 41 applies to actions, not individual claims or parties. Therefore, the Court treats the notices as motions under Rule 21. Rule 21 provides that “[o]n motion or on its own, the court may at any time, on just terms, add or drop a party.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 21. Unless the parties agree otherwise, the Court generally drops a party under Rule 21 without prejudice. See Michaels Bldg. Co. v. Ameritrust Co. N.A., 848 F.2d 674, 682 (6th Cir. 1988). Dismissal of a party under Rule 21 is committed to the sound discretion of the district court. Hiller v. HSBC Fin. Corp., 589 F. App’x 320, 321 (6th Cir. 2015) (per curiam) (citing Sutherland v. Michigan Dept of Treasury, 344 F.3d 6038, 612 (6th Cir. 2003)). Based on the Court’s review of the record, the Court sees no reason not to dismiss these defendants at this early stage of the proceedings. Further, no person has objected to their dismissal. Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE Plaintiffs claims against Defendants Mapleton Local School District, Mapleton Local School District Board of Education, Scott Smith, and Corey Kline and drops these parties from this litigation. Plaintiff shall bear her own costs and attorneys’ fees with respect to the parties dropped. SO ORDERED. Dated: September 18, 2024

J.PhilipCalabrese United States District Judge Northern District of Ohio

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

A.S. v. Black River Local School District, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/as-v-black-river-local-school-district-ohnd-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack