Chasteen v. Dayton Corr. Inst. ( 2011 )


Menu:
  • [Cite as Chasteen v. Dayton Corr. Inst., 
    2011-Ohio-4370
    .]
    Court of Claims of Ohio
    The Ohio Judicial Center
    65 South Front Street, Third Floor
    Columbus, OH 43215
    614.387.9800 or 1.800.824.8263
    www.cco.state.oh.us
    ADAM CHASTEEN
    Plaintiff
    v.
    DAYTON CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION
    Defendant
    Case No. 2011-01721-AD
    Deputy Clerk Daniel R. Borchert
    ENTRY OF DISMISSAL
    {¶1} On January 26, 2011, plaintiff, Adam Chasteen, filed a complaint against
    defendant, Dayton Correctional Institution.                 Defendant received the complaint on
    January 28, 2011. On April 4, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment. In
    support of the motion for default judgment, plaintiff stated in pertinent part:
    {¶2} “Pursuant to L.C.C.R. 6(A), the defendant in this action shall file the
    investigation report within sixty (60) days of receipt of the claim by the defendant;
    Plaintiff submits that no request for an extension of time has been filed by the
    Defendant, and that no answer or other defense has been filed by the Defendant.
    {¶3} “Wherefore, Plaintiff respectfully seeks an order from the Court entering an
    order of default judgment against the Defendant, and granting the relief requested in the
    original complaint to Plaintiff Chasteen.”
    {¶4} On April 8, 2011, defendant filed a motion for extension of time to file the
    investigation report.        In support of the motion for extension of time, defendant in
    pertinent part stated:
    Case No. 2011-01721-AD                      -2-                                     ENTRY
    {¶5} “Defendant requests an additional fourteen (14) days in order to file an
    Investigation Report in this case. The reason that this extension is necessary is the
    Defendant requires additional time to complete its investigation and gather documents.”
    {¶6} Civ.R. 55(D) in pertinent part states:
    {¶7} “No judgment by default shall be entered against this state . . . or agency . .
    . unless the claimant establishes his claim . . . by evidence satisfactory to the court.”
    {¶8} A default judgment against the state may not be granted solely on
    procedural errors made by the defendant. Upon review, plaintiff’s motion for default
    judgment is DENIED. Defendant’s motion for extension of time is MOOT.
    {¶9} On April 27, 2011, plaintiff filed a motion to dismiss. The plaintiff contends
    this court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to hear his claim so he requests his claim be
    dismissed. On April 27, 2011, defendant also filed a motion to dismiss. Plaintiff’s
    motion to dismiss is GRANTED and plaintiff’s case is DISMISSED. Defendant’s motion
    to dismiss is MOOT. The court shall absorb the court costs of this case.
    ________________________________
    DANIEL R. BORCHERT
    Deputy Clerk
    Entry cc:
    Adam Chasteen, #566-894                            Stephen A. Young
    P.O. Box 740                                       Department of Rehabilitation
    London, Ohio 43140                                 and Correction
    770 West Broad Street
    Columbus, Ohio 43222
    DRB/laa
    4/26
    Filed 5/26/11
    Sent to S.C. reporter 8/26/11
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2011-01721-AD

Judges: Borchert

Filed Date: 5/26/2011

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014