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

PEARSON, J.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
JANE DOE, et al., 	) 	CASE NO. 4:25-CV-01822
)
Plaintiffs, 	)
) 	JUDGE BENITA Y. PEARSON
v. 	)
)
URSULINE HIGH SCHOOL, et al., 	) 	MEMORANDUM OF OPINION
) 	AND ORDER
Defendants. 	) 	[Resolving ECF No. 92]
The Court considers Defendants Daniel Reardon, Timothy McGlynn, and Christian
Syrianoudis’ Motion to Strike (ECF No. 92). The Motion is granted in part. The paragraphs
identified herein are stricken.
I. B ACKGROUND
Defendants seek to strike 183 paragraphs from Plaintiffs’ Second Amended complaint,
see ECF No. 45, as immaterial, impertinent, scandalous, and designed to improperly illicit
sympathy, curry favor, or cast aspersions. See ECF No. 92 at PageID #: 1587. The contested
paragraphs are: ¶ 13, ¶¶ 51–53, ¶¶ 55–57, ¶ 72, ¶¶ 85–88, ¶¶ 90–123, ¶¶ 136–39, ¶¶ 141–50, ¶
157, ¶¶ 169–87, ¶ 398, ¶¶ 412–13, ¶ 415, ¶¶ 417–18, ¶¶ 453–54, ¶ 502, ¶ 519, ¶ 520 (second
sentence), ¶¶ 521–27, ¶¶ 533–37, ¶ 552, ¶¶ 594–95, ¶ 750, ¶ 752 (sentences 2–4), ¶¶ 768–96, ¶¶
823–49, ¶¶ 851–54, ¶ 884, ¶ 946, ¶ 953, ¶¶ 955–57, and ¶¶ 959–67. See ECF No. 45 at Page ID
##: 584–747.
Case: 4:25-cv-01822-BYP Doc #: 108 Filed: 12/17/25 1 of 3. PageID #: <pageID>

(4:25-CV-01822)
2
II. L AW
Plaintiffs filed this complaint in an Article III court. It was, therefore, required to contain
a short and plain statement of the grounds for jurisdiction, a short and plain statement of the
claim showing entitlement to relief, and a demand for the relief sought. See Fed. R. Civ P. 8(a).
Through Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f) a district court may––sua sponte or when moved––strike from a
pleading any “redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter.” See Akron Bd. of
Educ. v. Wallace, No. 5:16-CV-188, 2018 WL 4510087, at *1 (N.D. Ohio Sept. 19, 2018)
(Pearson, J.) A matter is immaterial when it “has no bearing on the subject matter of the
litigation.” McKinney v. Bayer Corp., No. 10-CV-224, 2010 WL 2756915 (N.D. Ohio July 12,
2010) (O’Malley, J.) A matter is impertinent when it “include[s] statements that are not
necessary to the issues presented.” Id. A matter is scandalous when it makes “any allegation
that unnecessarily reflects on the moral character of an individual or states anything in repulsive
language that detracts from the dignity of the court.” Id. (quoting Pigford v. Veneman, 215
F.R.D. 2, 4 (D. D.C. 2003)).
III. DISCUSSION
Plaintiffs’ second amended complaint does not speak; it shouts. See ECF No. 45. This
violates Fed. R. Civ P. 8: the identified paragraphs therein are neither short nor plain. The Court
exercises its substantial discretion to strike under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f) and thereby “avoid the
expenditure of time and money that must arise from litigating spurious issues by dispensing with
them early in the case.” Operating Eng'rs Loc. 324 Health Care Plan v. G & W Const. Co., 783
F.3d 1045, 1050 (6th Cir. 2015); see In re Keithley Instruments, Inc., Derivative Litig., 599 F.
Supp. 2d 908 (N.D. Ohio 2009) (Lioi, J.)
Case: 4:25-cv-01822-BYP Doc #: 108 Filed: 12/17/25 2 of 3. PageID #: <pageID>

(4:25-CV-01822)
3
IV. CONCLUSION
Defendants Daniel Reardon, Timothy McGlynn, and Christian Syrianoudis’ Motion to
Strike (ECF No. 92) is granted in part. The following paragraphs are hereby stricken from
Plaintiffs’ second amended complaint (ECF No. 45): ¶ 13 (including footnote), ¶ 7, ¶¶ 99–123, ¶
146, ¶ 157, ¶ 169, ¶ 398. ¶¶ 412–13, ¶ 415, ¶ 418, ¶¶ 453–54, ¶ 520 (second sentence), ¶¶ 533–
37, ¶ 552, ¶¶ 594–95, ¶ 750, ¶ 752 (sentences 2–4), ¶¶ 823–49, ¶¶ 851–54, ¶ 884, ¶ 946, ¶ 953,
¶¶ 955–57, and ¶¶ 959–67. The statements within those paragraphs are extraneous and shall
removed from Plaintiffs’ forthcoming third amended complaint, whether in their original or
renumbered form.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
December 17, 2025 	/s/ Benita Y. Pearson
Date 	Benita Y. Pearson
United States District Judge
Case: 4:25-cv-01822-BYP Doc #: 108 Filed: 12/17/25 3 of 3. PageID #: <pageID>