TAFLINGER v. HINDSON et al, No. 1:2009cv00771 - Document 200 (S.D. Ind. 2011)
Court Description: ENTRY ISSUING JUDGMENT - JUDGMENT is entered in favor of Westfield-Washington School Corporation. Plaintiff shall take nothing by way of her complaint to the extent it applies to Westfield-Washington School Corporation. At this time, a final judgment in this case will not issue as the claims against U.S. Swimming remain unresolved. Signed by Judge Tanya Walton Pratt on 11/14/2011.(JD)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
TAFLINGER v. HINDSON et al Doc. 200 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION BROOKE N. TAFLINGER, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) BRIAN HINDSON, CENTRAL INDIANA ) AQUATICS, UNITED STATES SWIMMING, ) INC., and WESTFIELD-WASHINGTON ) SCHOOL CORPORATION, ) ) Defendants. ) ) Case No. 1:09-cv-00771-TWP-DML ENTRY ISSUING JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF WESTFIELD-WASHINGTON SCHOOL CORPORATION ON REMAINING PENDING STATE LAW CLAIMS Given the parties’ familiarity with this case, the Court will provide only a brief summary of the procedural history leading up to the present entry. On January 26, 2011, the Court entered summary judgment in favor of Defendant Westfield-Washington School Corporation (the “School”) on all federal claims and Plaintiff’s state law claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress. The Court then opted not to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s remaining state law claims, remanding them back to Hamilton Superior Court No. 2. In response, the School and Co-Defendant United States Swimming, Inc. (“U.S. Swimming”) appealed, arguing that the Court abused its discretion by not maintaining supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims. The Seventh Circuit agreed, remanding the state law claims back to this Court. Importantly, in its order, the Seventh Circuit telegraphed how this Court should rule on the pending state law claims, remarking that the outcome of the summary judgment motions “is clear.” Now, Plaintiff appears to concede that her claims against the School must fail. Dockets.Justia.com Therefore, the Court believes that, at this time, judgment must be entered in favor of the School. Moreover, given the Seventh Circuit’s order, it appears that if Plaintiff’s claims against the School fail, then the claims against U.S. Swimming must meet the same fate. After all, the Seventh Circuit described the claims against U.S. Swimming as “even more tenuous.” Undeterred, Plaintiff has now asked the Court to re-open discovery with respect to U.S. Swimming. Given this outstanding issue, the Court believes it would be premature to enter judgment in favor of U.S. Swimming. Notably, however, nothing in this entry should be taken as insight into the Court’s views on the merits of Plaintiff’s request to re-open discovery. The Court will address this discovery issue – and whether judgment should be entered immediately in U.S. Swimming’s favor – in due course, as soon as its docket allows. JUDGMENT is entered in favor of Westfield-Washington School Corporation. Plaintiff shall take nothing by way of her complaint to the extent it applies to Westfield-Washington School Corporation. At this time, a final judgment in this case will not issue as the claims against U.S. Swimming remain unresolved. SO ORDERED: 11/14/2011 ________________________ Hon. Tanya Walton Pratt, Judge United States District Court Southern District of Indiana Laura A. Briggs, Clerk BY: __________________________________ Deputy Clerk, U. S. District Court Distribution attached. 2 Distribution to: B. Robert Allard CORSIGLA MCMAHON AND ALLARD rallard@cmalaw.net James M. Curran LAW OFFICE OF JAMES M. CURRAN jmc@currantriallaw.com,jimcurrantriallaw@yahoo.com Kristopher N. Kazmierczak KATZ & KORIN P.C. kkazmierczak@katzkorin.com,vellis@katzkorin.com Jonathan Charles Little LAW OFFICES OF JONATHAN LITTLE jonlittlelaw@gmail.com,jonlittle2004@yahoo.com Bernard Lowell Pylitt KATZ & KORIN P.C. bpylitt@katzkorin.com,vellis@katzkorin.com Thomas E. Wheeler , II FROST BROWN TODD LLC twheeler@fbtlaw.com,kdickerson@fbtlaw.com 3
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
