Venegas et al v. Wright State University et al, No. 3:2016cv00377 - Document 11 (S.D. Ohio 2017)

Court Description: DECISION AND ENTRY SUSTAINING MOTION TO DISMISS OF DEFENDANTS WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY AND CHRIS TAYLOR (DOC # 5 ) AS TO CLAIMS ONE THROUGH FOUR FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION, SUSTAINING DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STA TE A CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED (DOC. # 5 ) AS TO CLAIM FIVE, AND OVERRULING DEFENDANTS' MOTION AS TO CLAIM SIX, SUBJECT TO RENEWAL IF PLAINTIFFS CHOOSE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT; MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAINT OF PLAI NTIFFS DIEGO VENEGAS AND MARC SODINI (DOC # 7 ) IS OVERRULED, AS PLAINTIFFS HAVE NOT SET FORTH CLAIMS THAT WOULD SURVIVE A MOTION TO DISMISS; PLAINTIFFS' CLAIMS TWO THROUGH FIVE ARE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, AND JUDGMENT SHALL ULTIMATELY ENTER IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANTS AND AGAINST PLAINTIFFS ON THOSE CLAIMS; PLAINTIFFS MAY FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT AS TO CLAIM ONE WITHIN TWENTY-ONE DAYS OF THIS ENTRY, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH HEREIN AND THE STRICTURES OF RULE 11 ; IF PLAINTIFFS FAIL TO FILE A VIABLE AMENDED CLAIM ONE, THEN THE COURT WILL DISMISS CLAIM SIX WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO REFILING IN A STATE COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION. Signed by Judge Walter H. Rice on 8/21/17. (pb) Modified on 8/21/2017 (pb).

Download PDF
Venegas et al v. Wright State University et al Doc. 11 Dockets.Justia.com

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.