Leesemann et al v. Lowes Home Centers,Inc et al
Filing
12
ORDER - The Court therefore ORDERS Plaintiffs to file, on or before May 31, 2013, a Motion to Amend their Complaint with their proposed AmendedComplaint attached. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sharon L Ovington on 5/17/2013. (kf)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
GREGORY LEESEMANN, et. al.,
Plaintiffs,
:
LOWE’S HOME CENTERS,
INC., et al,
Case No. 3:13cv00068
:
vs.
:
District Judge Walter Herbert Rice
Chief Magistrate Judge Sharon Ovington
:
:
Defendants.
:
ORDER
This negligence case began in state court. Defendant Lowe’s Home Centers, Inc.
removed the case to this Court, pointing to the existence of diversity jurisdiction.
During the initial-disclosure phase required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a), Plaintiffs
learned the actual identity of the person – Dana Kuhn – who had been named as a John
Doe Defendant in the Complaint. Consequently, Plaintiffs filed a motion to remand this
case to state court on the ground that Kuhn’s Ohio residency destroyed this Court’s
diversity jurisdiction. Although Plaintiffs have not yet sought leave to amend their
Complaint, they affirm in the motion to remand that they will be “moving to amend the
complaint shortly” to identify Dana Kuhn as a Defendant and to substitute him in place of
Defendant John Doe. (Doc. #6, PageID at 36).
The addition of Dana Kuhn as a defendant in this case might be warranted and
may have an impact on resolution of the parties’ contentions concerning Plaintiffs’
pending motion to remand. Additionally, Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2) requires Plaintiffs to
obtain leave to amend their Complaint before Dana Kuhn can be substituted as a
defendant in place of John Doe. The Court therefore ORDERS Plaintiffs to file, on or
before May 31, 2013, a Motion to Amend their Complaint with their proposed Amended
Complaint attached.
May 17, 2013
s/ Sharon L. Ovington
Sharon L. Ovington
United States Magistrate Judge
2
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?