Jones v. Village of Golf Manor, 1:18cv403. (2019)
Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20190617579
Visitors: 29
Filed: Jun. 05, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 05, 2019
Summary: ORDER SUSAN J. DLOTT , District Judge . This matter is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings and filed with this Court on April 11, 2019 a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 40). Subsequently, the plaintiff filed objections to such Report and Recommendation (Doc
Summary: ORDER SUSAN J. DLOTT , District Judge . This matter is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings and filed with this Court on April 11, 2019 a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 40). Subsequently, the plaintiff filed objections to such Report and Recommendation (Doc...
More
ORDER
SUSAN J. DLOTT, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings and filed with this Court on April 11, 2019 a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 40). Subsequently, the plaintiff filed objections to such Report and Recommendation (Doc. 42) and defendants filed a response to the objections (Doc. 44).
The Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court does determine that such Recommendation should be adopted.
Accordingly, because plaintiff failed to state a cognizable federal claim for relief, the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiffs' state-law claims against the Defendants Timothy Ingram, Todd Kinskey, Joy Pierson, and Tucker Stone pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3). Therefore Defendants' motions to dismiss (Docs. 21, 22) are GRANTED and plaintiffs' claims against Defendants Timothy Ingram, Todd Kinskey, Joy Pierson and Tucker Stone are DISMISSED.
Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a second amended complaint (Doc. 31) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
