Collins v. Clancy et al
Filing
99
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 83 Plaintiff's MOTION to Dismiss Defendants Patricia Clancy and Tracy Winkler. It is RECOMMENDED THAT the motion to dismiss be GRANTED and that all claims against Defendants Hamilton County Clerk of Court Patr icia Clancy, in both her official and individual capacities, and Hamilton County Clerk of Court Tracy Winkler be dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff's claims against the remaining Defendants shall proceed at this time. Objections to R&R due by 11/18/2013. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman on 10/31/2013. (km1)
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
TIMOTHY COLLINS,
Case No. 1:12-cv-152
Plaintiff,
Weber, J.
Bowman, M.J.
v.
PATRICIA M. CLANCY, et al.,
Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Proceeding under 42 U.S.C. §1983, Plaintiff Timothy Collins filed this case
against multiple Defendants including the former and current Hamilton County Clerk of
Courts. On September 6, 2013, Plaintiff filed a motion to dismiss the Hamilton County
Defendants, without prejudice.
(Doc. 83).
Plaintiff represents that he seeks the
dismissal of “Defendant Patricia Clancy [who] was named as a Defendant in both her
individual and official capacity and Defendant Tracy Winkler [who] was named as a
Defendant in her official capacity.” (Id.).
The undersigned notes that although the “Hamilton County Clerk of Courts” is a
named Defendant, Tracy Winkler is not specifically listed on the docket sheet.
It
appears that this may have been an administrative oversight, to the extent that Ms.
Winkler is identified by name, in her official capacity, in both the Amended Complaint
and Answer to the Second Amended Complaint. (Docs. 47, 52). Any variation in the
identity of the Defendant on the docket sheet is of little import, to the extent that
because Plaintiff has named Ms. Winkler solely in her official capacity, the identity of her
by the title of the office she holds is sufficient.
In any event, as Plaintiff states that neither of the referenced Defendants
opposes his motion, and no other Defendant has filed any opposition, IT IS
RECOMMENDED THAT the motion to dismiss both Hamilton County Clerk of Court
Patricia Clancy, in both her official and individual capacities, and Hamilton County Clerk
of Court Tracy Winkler, in her official capacity, (Doc. 83) be GRANTED, and that all
claims against those Defendants be dismissed without prejudice.
Plaintiff’s claims
against the remaining Defendants shall proceed at this time. 1
s/ Stephanie K. Bowman
Stephanie K. Bowman
United States Magistrate Judge
1
All other Defendants have moved for summary judgment. (Docs. 85, 86). Plaintiff has filed memoranda
in opposition to those motions, but the Defendants’ reply time has not yet expired.
2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
TIMOTHY COLLINS,
Case No. 1:12-cv-152
Plaintiff,
Weber, J.
Bowman, M.J.
v.
PATRICIA M. CLANCY, et al.,
Defendants.
NOTICE
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written
objections to this Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS
of the filing date of this R&R. That period may be extended further by the Court on
timely motion by either side for an extension of time. All objections shall specify the
portion(s) of the R&R objected to, and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law
in support of the objections. A party shall respond to an opponent’s objections within
FOURTEEN (14) DAYS after being served with a copy of those objections. Failure to
make objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir.
1981).
3
]]>
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.
Why Is My Information Online?
