Troy Harvey v. City of Troy, Ohio, et al.

S.D. Ohio

Troy Harvey v. City of Troy, Ohio, et al.

District Court, S.D. Ohio·Decided April 14, 2026·No. 3:26-cv-00014·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION (DAYTON)

TROY HARVEY, : Case No. 3:26-cv-00014 : Plaintiff, : District Judge Thomas M. Rose : Magistrate Judge Caroline H. Gentry vs. : : CITY OF TROY, OHIO, et al., : : Defendants.

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to stay this case pending completion of proceedings in the Ohio Civil Rights Commission (OCRC). (Doc. No. 7.) Plaintiff asserts that he filed a Charge of Discrimination in the OCRC based on the conduct described in the Complaint. (Id. at PageID 30.) As the Complaint has not yet been formally screened, no defendants have yet been served, and no responses to the motion have been filed. No other information about the OCRC proceeding has been provided. It may be appropriate to stay this case or to abstain from hearing it.1 Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a Status Report providing additional information about the OCRC proceedings and their current status. He shall file the Status Report by April 28, 2026. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Caroline H. Gentry Caroline H. Gentry United States Magistrate Judge

1 See generally Peebles v. Univ. of Dayton, 412 F. Supp. 2d 814, 816 (S.D. Ohio 2005) (quoting New Orleans Public Service, Inc., v. City of New Orleans, 491 U.S. 350, 370 (1989) (“the Supreme Court requires federal courts to abstain from interfering in pending state administrative proceedings that are ‘judicial in nature.’”); Colbert v. Towne Props., Inc., No. 1:12-cv-952, 2013 WL 1438017, at *4 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 9, 2013) (discussing “whether to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice or stay the

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION (DAYTON)

TROY HARVEY, : Case No. 3:26-cv-00014 : Plaintiff, : District Judge Thomas M. Rose : Magistrate Judge Caroline H. Gentry vs. : : CITY OF TROY, OHIO, et al., : : Defendants.

ORDER

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to stay this case pending completion of proceedings in the Ohio Civil Rights Commission (OCRC). (Doc. No. 7.) Plaintiff asserts that he filed a Charge of Discrimination in the OCRC based on the conduct described in the Complaint. (Id. at PageID 30.) As the Complaint has not yet been formally screened, no defendants have yet been served, and no responses to the motion have been filed. No other information about the OCRC proceeding has been provided. It may be appropriate to stay this case or to abstain from hearing it.1 Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a Status Report providing additional information about the OCRC proceedings and their current status. He shall file the Status Report by April 28, 2026. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Caroline H. Gentry Caroline H. Gentry United States Magistrate Judge

1 See generally Peebles v. Univ. of Dayton, 412 F. Supp. 2d 814, 816 (S.D. Ohio 2005) (quoting New Orleans Public Service, Inc., v. City of New Orleans, 491 U.S. 350, 370 (1989) (“the Supreme Court requires federal courts to abstain from interfering in pending state administrative proceedings that are ‘judicial in nature.’”); Colbert v. Towne Props., Inc., No. 1:12-cv-952, 2013 WL 1438017, at *4 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 9, 2013) (discussing “whether to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice or stay the

Troy Harvey v. City of Troy, Ohio, et al., (S.D. Ohio 2026).

Pincite

Troy Harvey v. City of Troy, Ohio, et al. (Troy Harvey v. City of Troy, Ohio, et al.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related