Wallace v. Montgomery County Ohio/Montgomery County Board of Commissioners et al
Filing
43
ENTRY AND ORDER SETTING HEARING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. 28 ) BY MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEFENDANTS AND DEFENDANT JERRID CAMPBELL'S REQUEST FOR REPRESENTATION UNDER OHIO REVISED CODE 2744.07(C)ORDER - The Court orders the parties appear at a hearing on September 25, 2018 at 1:30 PM regarding the Motion for Summary Judgment and, specifically, the duty to defend under Section 2744.07. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 8/27/18. (ep)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
DARYL WALLACE,
Plaintiff,
v.
MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO,
et al.,
Defendants.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Case No. 3:17-cv-183
Judge Thomas M. Rose
ENTRY AND ORDER SETTING HEARING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT (DOC. 28) BY MONTGOMERY COUNTY DEFENDANTS AND
DEFENDANT JERRID CAMPBELL’S REQUEST FOR REPRESENTATION
UNDER OHIO REVISED CODE 2744.07(C)
This case is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 28) filed by the
Montgomery County Defendants. In response to the Motion for Summary Judgment, Defendant
Jerrid Campbell requested a hearing regarding Montgomery County’s duty to defend under Ohio
Rev. Code 2744.07. The Montgomery County Defendants concur with Campbell that “the only
way to interpret the plain language of Ohio Revised Code 2744.07(C) is that an oral hearing must
occur concerning a duty to defend, if requested by either the political subdivision or the employee.”
(Doc. 37 at 2.) The Court therefore orders the parties appear at a hearing on September 25, 2018
at 1:30 PM regarding the Motion for Summary Judgment and, specifically, the duty to defend
under Section 2744.07.
DONE and ORDERED in Dayton, Ohio, this Monday, August 27, 2018.
s/Thomas M. Rose
________________________________
THOMAS M. ROSE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?