From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Batton v. Sandusky Cnty., Ohio

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Western Division
Apr 10, 2023
3:21-cv-1771 (N.D. Ohio Apr. 10, 2023)

Opinion

3:21-cv-1771

04-10-2023

Sara Batton, Plaintiff, v. Sandusky County, Ohio, et al, Defendants.


ORDER

Jeffrey J. Helmick, United States District Judge.

On January 27, 2023, Defendant Peggy Defibaugh filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings seeking judgment in her favor of all claims asserted against her in this action. (Doc. No. 53). In response, Plaintiff Sara Batton filed a motion to dismiss those claims and Defibaugh as a Defendant to this action, without prejudice. (Doc. No. 57). No Defendant opposed this motion.

After reviewing the motions, I grant Batton's motion and dismiss all claims against Defibaugh without prejudice pursuant to Rule 21 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See, e.g., Sheet Metal Workers' Nat'l Pension Fund Bd. of Trs. v. Courtad, Inc., No. 5:12-cv-2738, 2013 WL 3893556, at *4 (N.D. Ohio July 26, 2013) (“A plaintiff seeking to dismiss only one defendant from an action must move the Court to do so under Rule 21.”). In turn, I deny Defibaugh's motion as moot.

So Ordered.


Summaries of

Batton v. Sandusky Cnty., Ohio

United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Western Division
Apr 10, 2023
3:21-cv-1771 (N.D. Ohio Apr. 10, 2023)
Case details for

Batton v. Sandusky Cnty., Ohio

Case Details

Full title:Sara Batton, Plaintiff, v. Sandusky County, Ohio, et al, Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Ohio, Western Division

Date published: Apr 10, 2023

Citations

3:21-cv-1771 (N.D. Ohio Apr. 10, 2023)