Hutchinson v. City of Middletown, Ohio et al
DECISION AND ENTRY adopting Report and Recommendations re 4 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Judge Timothy S. Black on 2/16/2021. (rrs)
Case: 1:20-cv-00901-TSB-KLL Doc #: 18 Filed: 02/16/21 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 124
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
CITY OF MIDDLETOWN, OHIO, et al., :
Case No. 1:20-cv-901
Judge Timothy S. Black
Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz
DECISION AND ENTRY
ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 17)
This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference to United
States Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate
Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court and, on November 18, 2020, submitted
a Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 4). On January 20, 2021, Defendants Raqib
Ahmed and Andrew Minic filed objections. (Doc. 13).
As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has
reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all
of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing and Defendants’
objections, the Court finds that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 4) should be and
is hereby adopted in its entirety.
Defendants’ sole objection is that the Magistrate Judge erred by allowing
individual capacity claims to proceed against Defendants Ahmed and Minic. (Doc. 13 at
2). Defendants contend that because Plaintiff did not “check the box” on a pro se
Case: 1:20-cv-00901-TSB-KLL Doc #: 18 Filed: 02/16/21 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 125
complaint form for “individual capacity,” and only checked the “official capacity” box,
Plaintiff “made an affirmative decision to sue Sergeant Ahmed and Officer Minic in that
[official] capacity only.” (Id. (emphasis added))
A complaint filed by a pro se plaintiff must be “liberally construed” and “held to
less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers.” Erickson v. Pardus,
551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007) (per curiam) (quoting Estelle v. Gamble, 429 U.S. 97, 106, 97
S.Ct. 285, 50 L.Ed.2d 251 (1976)). The Magistrate Judge concluded – and this Court
agrees – that when construing Plaintiff’s Complaint liberally, Plaintiff’s claims against
Defendants Ahmed and Minic in their individual capacity should move forward.
Accordingly, this objection is not well-taken. 1
Accordingly, for the reasons stated above:
The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 4) is hereby ADOPTED;
Plaintiff’s claims against the City of Middletown, Ohio and Defendants
Ahmed and Minic in their official capacities only are DISMISSED with
Defendants Ahmed and Minic’s objections are OVERRULED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Timothy S. Black
Timothy S. Black
United States District Judge
Defendants Ahmed and Minic also have already answered Plaintiff’s complaint. (Doc. 13).
Had Defendants taken issue with the form and pleading of Plaintiff’s complaint, as asserted in
their objections, Defendants could have chosen another response to Plaintiff’s complaint.
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?