J.B., a minor, by her Father and next friend, Guy Blume, et al. v. Liberty Local Schools

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio denied Guy Blume’s pro se motion to amend the complaint or voluntarily dismiss the action because it was superseded by a later motion to amend. The court also denied Plaintiffs’ later motion to amend. The opinion recounts the factual allegations concerning a reported sexual assault at Liberty Local Middle School and the parties’ litigation history, including pending cross-motions for summary judgment.

Holdings

1. Plaintiff Blume's March 2025 pro se motion to amend or voluntarily dismiss was superseded and replaced by the August 2025 motion to amend filed by pro bono counsel and was therefore denied on that basis.
2. Plaintiffs failed to establish good cause under Rule 16(b) for modifying the March 30, 2023 pleading-amendment deadline.
3. Amendment was denied because plaintiffs did not first satisfy Rule 16(b), and the late amendment would substantially prejudice Liberty Local by requiring additional discovery and expense after discovery had closed and summary-judgment motions were pending.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Plaintiff Guy Blume's pro se motion to amend or voluntarily dismiss should be considered or was superseded by the later motion filed by appointed counsel.
2. Whether plaintiffs established good cause under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b) to modify the expired pleading-amendment deadline.
3. If good cause existed, whether amendment should be permitted under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2).
4. Whether alleged deficiencies or misconduct by plaintiffs' former attorney established good cause for an untimely amendment.
5. Whether the proposed amendment would unduly prejudice the defendant because it was sought after discovery closed and summary-judgment motions were pending.

Disposition

other