From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Richardson v. Industrial Commission of Ohio

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division at Dayton
Mar 17, 2010
Case No. 3:09-cv-455 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 17, 2010)

Opinion

Case No. 3:09-cv-455.

March 17, 2010


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS


The Court has reviewed the Second Report and Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz (Doc. #16), to whom this case was referred pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and noting that no objections have been filed thereto and that the time for filing such objections under Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) expired on March 16, 2010, hereby ADOPTS said Report and Recommendations.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Amended Complaint against Defendants TI Automotive Group Systems, Industrial Commission, Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation, Marsha Ryan, Administrator of Ohio Bureau of Workers' Compensation, and Product Action International be DISMISSED without prejudice. The Amended Complaint against Defendants John Doe co-worker, Magistrate Robert Cowdrey, Deputy Clerk M Kelly and Staff District Hearing Officers Judy Veltren, W L Brill, Steven Ward and Jack Boller be DISMISSED with prejudice.


Summaries of

Richardson v. Industrial Commission of Ohio

United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division at Dayton
Mar 17, 2010
Case No. 3:09-cv-455 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 17, 2010)
Case details for

Richardson v. Industrial Commission of Ohio

Case Details

Full title:Earl Richardson, Plaintiff, v. Industrial Commission of Ohio, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division at Dayton

Date published: Mar 17, 2010

Citations

Case No. 3:09-cv-455 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 17, 2010)

Citing Cases

Swint v. Ohio Bureau of Workmen's Comp.

See Will v. Mich. Dep't of State Police, 491 U.S. 58, 65-68, 109 S. Ct. 2304, 105 L. Ed. 2d 45 (1989) (the…

Richardson v. TI Auto. Grp. Sys.

A dismissal with prejudice operates as a final adjudication on the merits for purposes of determining whether…