Legal Opinion
City of Dayton v. A.R. Environmental, Inc.
District Court, S.D. Ohio
Decided May 21, 2012No. 3:11-cv-383PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER: (1) GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO DISMISS (DOC. 36); (2) DISMISSING ALL OF DEFENDANT PENLAND’S PRO SE COUNTERCLAIMS PLED AGAINST PLAINTIFF; AND (3) DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFF’S THREE OTHER MOTIONS TO DISMISS (DOCS. 9,15, 49)
MICHAEL J. NEWMAN, United States Magistrate Judge.
This consent ease is before the Court on a Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss filed by-Plaintiff City of Dayton (“City”) *777with respect to the counterclaims pled against the City by Defendant Alex Pen-land (“Penland”). Penland, who proceeds pro se, is now incarcerated in the Correctional Reception Center in…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- City of Canton v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Alexander v. SandovalSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Jarvis Peele, et al. v. Randy Harris, et al.District Court, W.D. Kentucky · 2026
- Stanley v. Historic Newark Basket, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2023