Ladyman v. Meade et al

Filing 86

OPINION AND ORDER: Plaintiff Craig C. Ladyman's "Revised Complaint for Compensatory and Punitive Damages, Injunctive and Declaratory Relief, and Demand for Jury Trial" DE 85 is STRICKEN as untimely filed without leave of Court. Signed by Judge Philip P Simon on 6/25/18. (Copy mailed to pro se party). (nal)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
SOUTH BEND DIVISION
CRAIG C. LADYMAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
NICHOLAS MEADE, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CAUSE NO. 3:14CV2038-PPS

OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Craig C. Ladyman, acting without an attorney, began this lawsuit more
than 3½ years ago in November 2014. After the pleading and discovery stages finally
concluded in May of this year, the case had been whittled down to claims against a sole
remaining defendant, Jeanne Drust. To determine whether a trial of those claims is
necessary, deadlines for potentially dispositive motions have been set. Any motion for
summary judgment is to be filed by June 29, with oppositions due 14 days thereafter and
any reply filed within 10 days of an opposition. [DE 84.] On April 26, 2018, Magistrate
Judge Gotsch entered an order striking an untimely attempt by Ladyman to amend his
complaint [DE 75], and Judge Gotsch’s order was affirmed by my May 31, 2018 order
denying Ladyman’s motion for review of the magistrate judge’s decision [DE 81.]
That order explained what I reiterate here in even plainer terms: the proceedings in
this lawsuit are past the point of amending pleadings, and Ladyman cannot amend his
complaint without being granted leave to do so based on some compelling argument for
allowing such a step at this very late date. Nonetheless, on June 22, 2018, Ladyman has
filed a “Revised Complaint for Compensatory and Punitive Damages, Injunctive and

Declaratory Relief, and Demand for Jury Trial.” [DE 85.] The 12-page document names
defendants Meade, Bohner, Smith, Gupta, Drust, Wicks, Burton, Whitmer, Bauer, Hudson
and Hill. The would-be amended complaint is not accompanied by any motion for leave
to file it, in which Ladyman offers an argument as to the appropriateness and necessity of
an amendment at this juncture, after previously having been told several times that he is
too late. The “Revised Complaint” will be stricken.
ACCORDINGLY:
Plaintiff Craig C. Ladyman’s “Revised Complaint for Compensatory and Punitive
Damages, Injunctive and Declaratory Relief, and Demand for Jury Trial” [DE 85] is
STRICKEN as untimely filed without leave of Court.
SO ORDERED.
ENTERED: June 25, 2018.
/s/ Philip P. Simon
United States District Court Judge

2