Filed: May 06, 2014
Latest Update: May 06, 2014
Summary: ORDER SHARON L. OVINGTON, Chief Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff Eric D. Wheeler, a resident of Dayton, Ohio, brings this case pro se naming as Defendants the Dayton Police Department, as well as Police Officers Michael L. Skidmore, Charles Hurley, and Greg Mills. (Doc. #2, PageID# 12-13). Plaintiff challenges the Officers' actions during an incident at his apartment in August 2013. ( Id. ). On September 25, 2013, Defendants Skidmore, Hurley, and Mills timely filed their Answer. (Doc. #8). On
Summary: ORDER SHARON L. OVINGTON, Chief Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff Eric D. Wheeler, a resident of Dayton, Ohio, brings this case pro se naming as Defendants the Dayton Police Department, as well as Police Officers Michael L. Skidmore, Charles Hurley, and Greg Mills. (Doc. #2, PageID# 12-13). Plaintiff challenges the Officers' actions during an incident at his apartment in August 2013. ( Id. ). On September 25, 2013, Defendants Skidmore, Hurley, and Mills timely filed their Answer. (Doc. #8). On M..
More
ORDER
SHARON L. OVINGTON, Chief Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff Eric D. Wheeler, a resident of Dayton, Ohio, brings this case pro se naming as Defendants the Dayton Police Department, as well as Police Officers Michael L. Skidmore, Charles Hurley, and Greg Mills. (Doc. #2, PageID# 12-13). Plaintiff challenges the Officers' actions during an incident at his apartment in August 2013. (Id.).
On September 25, 2013, Defendants Skidmore, Hurley, and Mills timely filed their Answer. (Doc. #8). On March 24, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting default judgment be entered against the Dayton Police Department because — unlike Defendants Skidmore, Hurley, and Mills — it did not file an answer. (Doc. #10, PageID# 83). Defendants thereafter filed a memorandum in opposition, contending the Dayton Police Department is not sui juris, not an independent suable legal entity. (Doc. #11, PageID## 89-90).
Indeed, the Dayton Police Department is not sui juris and therefore Plaintiff may not pursue claims against it. See Williams v. Dayton Police Dep't., 680 F.Supp. 1075, 1080 (S.D. Ohio 1987); see also Jones v. Marcum, 197 F.Supp.2d 991, 997 (S.D. Ohio 2002). Accordingly, Plaintiff's request for default judgment against the Dayton Police Department lacks merit.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. #10) is DENIED.
