Foley et al v. University of Dayton Office of Legal Affairs et al, No. 3:2015cv00096 - Document 53 (S.D. Ohio 2016)

Court Description: DECISION AND ENTRY SUSTAINING DEFENDANT DYLAN PARFITT'S UNOPPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS AND MOTION TO LIFT STAY (DOC. # 49 ) AND UNOPPOSED MOTION OF DEFENDANT, MICHAEL GROFF, FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS (DOC. # 50 ) - On November 3, 2016, the Supreme Court of Ohio held that no cause of action exists in Ohio for negligent misidentification. Foley v. University of Dayton, --N.E.3d--, 2016-0hio-7591, 2016 WL 6519115. Given that this was the only claim asserted agai nst Defendants Dylan Parfitt and Michael Groff, the Court SUSTAINS Defendant Dylan Parfitt's Supplemental Motion for Judgment on thePleadings (Doc. # 49 ), and Motion of Defendant Michael Groff, for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. # 50 ). Both motions are unopposed.Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 12/6/16. (kma)