Jane Doe et al. v. Ursuline High School et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio grants in part the Coach Defendants’ motion for an extension of time to answer and strikes Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint in its entirety. The court permits refiling subject to removal of previously stricken material, allows certain grammatical changes to remain, and warns counsel that further nonconforming or frivolous filings may result in sanctions.

Holdings

1. The Third Amended Complaint did not comply with the court's order because Plaintiffs replaced stricken material with substantive legal argument and objections, and the pleading was therefore stricken in its entirety.
2. Minor grammatical, clerical, and typographical changes, including conforming terminology to the court's pseudonym order, were non-substantive and could remain in a conforming Third Amended Complaint.
3. The motion for an extension of time to answer was granted in part, and the Coach Defendants were permitted to respond to any conforming Third Amended Complaint within seven days after it was filed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Coach Defendants established good cause for an extension of time to answer the Third Amended Complaint.
2. Whether Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint complied with the court's order permitting only specified deletions and prohibiting other substantive amendments.
3. Whether minor grammatical and typographical changes constituted impermissible amendments.

Disposition

other