McDowell v. The Board of Trustees for Perry Township, Stark County, Ohio
2:23-cv-02860
S.D. OhioMar 11, 2025Background
- Plaintiffs (McDowell and TMI) sued Perry Township and former Police Chief Pomesky, alleging retaliation and wrongful prosecution after TMI was retained for an HR assessment and McDowell became a target of investigation.
- Following McDowell’s interview of township employees expressing concerns over retaliation, Pomesky investigated McDowell, leading to her arrest for misdemeanor falsification and obstructing official business (ultimately dismissed).
- Plaintiffs brought both federal (§1983) and state law claims, including false arrest, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, and various state torts.
- The case was removed to federal court by Defendants on federal question grounds, and Defendants filed motions for summary judgment.
- Plaintiffs moved to dismiss their federal claims and sought remand of the remaining state law claims to state court, arguing they wished to pursue only the state law claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Voluntary dismissal of federal claims | No prejudice; seek to pursue strongest state claims | Dismissal post-discovery prejudicial | Dismissal permitted; no plain legal prejudice. |
| Proper procedural vehicle for partial dismissal | Rule 41(a)(2) or, alternatively, Rule 15 or 21 | - | Treated as both Rule 15 and Rule 21; granted. |
| Remand of remaining state law claims | All federal claims gone; state law claims should go | Remaining state-law claim raises fed issue | Remand denied; claim 10 raises federal issue. |
| Whether federal question jurisdiction remains | Intend not to pursue fed basis in claim 10 | Complaint itself raises fed question | Jurisdiction based on complaint; remand denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Walther v. Fla. Tile, Inc., [citation="776 F. App'x 310"] (primary purpose of Rule 41(a)(2) is to protect nonmovants from unfair treatment)
- Grover by Grover v. Eli Lilly & Co., 33 F.3d 716 (sets out factors for voluntary dismissals and legal prejudice)
- Gamel v. City of Cincinnati, 625 F.3d 949 (usual practice is to dismiss/remand state claims after federal claims are dismissed)
- Letherer v. Alger Grp., LLC, 328 F.3d 262 (Rule 41 voluntary dismissal is of an "action," not individual claims)
- Gunn v. Minton, 568 U.S. 251 (federal jurisdiction exists if a state claim necessarily raises a substantial federal question)