Spence v. Champaign County Ohio Auditor

Filing 9

ENTRY AND ORDER GRANTING SPENCE'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND (Doc. 5 ); ORDERING SPENCE TO FILE HER FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DENYING CHAMPAIGN COUNTY'S MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. 3 ) WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO REFILING. Spence is ordered to fil e her First Amended Complaint not later than 10 days following entry of this Order. Further, because presumably a First Amended Complaint will be filed, the Champaign County, Ohio Auditors pending Motion To Dismiss is denied without prejudice to renewal. Signed by Judge Thomas M Rose on 10/2/14. (ep)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
ANGELA M. SPENCE,
Case No. 3:14-cv-209
Plaintiff,
Judge Thomas M. Rose
-vCHAMPAIGN COUNTY, OHIO AUDITOR,
Defendant.
______________________________________________________________________________
ENTRY AND ORDER GRANTING SPENCE’S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO
AMEND (Doc. #5); ORDERING SPENCE TO FILE HER FIRST
AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DENYING CHAMPAIGN COUNTY’S
MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. #3) WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO REFILING
______________________________________________________________________________
The Complaint in this case was filed on June 24, 2014, by Plaintiff Angela M. Spence
(“Spence”). (Doc. #1.) The Champaign County, Ohio Auditor was the only Defendant named in
Spence’s original Complaint.
On August 21, 2014, the Champaign County, Ohio Auditor filed a Motion To Dismiss.
(Doc. #3.) Spence responded to this Motion (doc. #6) and, on the same date, filed a Motion for
Leave To File First Amended Complaint (doc. #5). On September 29, 2014, the Champaign
County, Ohio Auditor filed a Reply to its Motion To Dismiss. (Doc. #8.) Therein, the
Champaign County, Ohio Auditor refers to Spence’s Motion To Amend so the Court considers
the Reply to also be a response to the Motion To Amend.
In general, leave to amend a complaint should be granted unless an amendment is
“brought in bad faith, for dilatory purposes, results in undue delay or prejudice to the opposing
party or would be futile.” Carson v. U.S. Office of Special Counsel, 633 F.3d 487, 495 (6th Cir.
2011) (quoting Crawford v. Roane, 53 F.3d 750, 753 (6th Cir. 1995)). In this case, the

Champaign County, Ohio Auditor does not argue that the proposed amended complaint is
brought in bad faith, for dilatory purposes or would result in undue delay or prejudice or that it
would be futile.
Therefore, Spence’s Motion To Amend (Doc. #5) is GRANTED. Spence is ordered to
file her First Amended Complaint not later than 10 days following entry of this Order. Further,
because presumably a First Amended Complaint will be filed, the Champaign County, Ohio
Auditor’s pending Motion To Dismiss is denied without prejudice to renewal.
DONE and ORDERED in Dayton, Ohio this Second Day of October, 2014.

s/Thomas M. Rose
_______________________________
THOMAS M. ROSE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record

-2-