From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mann v. Costin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
Jun 5, 2015
Case No. 2:15-cv-1724 (S.D. Ohio Jun. 5, 2015)

Opinion

Case No. 2:15-cv-1724

06-05-2015

Nathan Mann, Plaintiff, v. Richard Costin, et al., Defendants.


OPINION AND ORDER

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and General Order 14-01, Magistrate Judge Deavers performed an initial screen of this case and recommended the Court dismiss the action, without prejudice to filing in state court, for failure to assert any claim over which the Court has subject matter jurisdiction. Report and Recommendation 1, ECF No. 2. Magistrate Judge Deavers concluded that Plaintiffs complaint raised only state law tort claims and that it did not provide a basis for federal jurisdiction. Id. at 2.

The report and recommendation ("R&R") advised the parties of their right to object and warned them that a failure to object would amount to a waiver of the right to de novo review by the Undersigned as well as a waiver of the right to appeal the judgment of the District Court. Id. at 3-4.

The deadline for filing objections has passed, and none were filed. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the R&R and DISMISSES the case without prejudice to filing in state court. Further, the Court DENIES as moot Plaintiff's pending motion for appointment of counsel, ECF No. 3. The Clerk shall terminate ECF No. 3 and dismiss this action without prejudice to filing in state court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ _________

MICHAEL H. WATSON, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


Summaries of

Mann v. Costin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION
Jun 5, 2015
Case No. 2:15-cv-1724 (S.D. Ohio Jun. 5, 2015)
Case details for

Mann v. Costin

Case Details

Full title:Nathan Mann, Plaintiff, v. Richard Costin, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Date published: Jun 5, 2015

Citations

Case No. 2:15-cv-1724 (S.D. Ohio Jun. 5, 2015)