This judgment entry records the outcome of a jury trial in which the jury found in favor of Defendant Joseph Foreman on all claims. The court dismisses the case, denies injunctive relief, and orders costs to be split between Plaintiffs and Defendant Foreman.

This filing is a memorandum in support of Defendant Joseph Edgar Foreman's motion for a directed verdict under Ohio Civil Rule 50, submitted after the close of the plaintiffs' case at trial. It argues that the plaintiffs' claims for invasion of privacy (false light) and defamation should be dismissed as a matter of law due to insufficient evidence and failure to meet legal requirements. The memorandum analyzes each plaintiff's claims and concludes that none can prevail under the applicable standards.

This filing is a legal brief submitted by Defendant Joseph Edgar Foreman, through his attorney, in response to a court order requiring briefing on the applicable statute of limitations for the Defendant's counterclaims. The document analyzes the relevant statutes and case law for each counterclaim, details the timeline of filings and events, and argues that all counterclaims were filed within the applicable limitations periods. It includes a memorandum in support, a conclusion, and a certificate of service.

This notice informs parties that the court intends to bar Adam Corey Muniz from further participation on behalf of Media Access, Inc. and to strike any pleadings previously filed by him, due to unauthorized practice of law. Parties may file objections or responses by January 30, 2026.

This is a journal entry from the Court of Common Pleas, Adams County, Ohio, scheduling a telephone conference for November 26, 2024, at 2:00pm. The entry instructs plaintiff's counsel to initiate the call and provides instructions for contacting the Assignment Commissioner. The clerk is directed to deliver a copy of the entry to counsel of record and the defendant.

This order grants the joint stipulation of plaintiffs and defendants to stay discovery on the defendants' counterclaims pending the resolution of immunity arguments in the plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the pleadings.

This is a joint stipulation by both plaintiffs and defendants to stay discovery on the defendants' counterclaims until the court resolves the immunity arguments raised in the plaintiffs' pending Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. The parties agree that discovery will continue on the plaintiffs' claims and defendants' defenses, and that the stay is not intended to delay litigation but to conserve resources.

This order grants the motion for admission pro hac vice for attorney Vera Eidelman, allowing her to appear as co-counsel for the defendant Joseph Edgar Foreman, aka Afroman, in the case, subject to certain conditions.

This order grants permission to a media representative from WCPO 9 News to record the proceedings of a scheduled phone conference in the case of Shawn D. Cooley vs. Joseph Edgar Foreman, before Judge J. McBride on April 20, 2023.

This is an amicus curiae brief filed by the ACLU and ACLU of Ohio in support of the defendants' motion to dismiss and motion to strike the plaintiffs' complaint. The brief argues that the plaintiffs, law enforcement officers, are attempting to use tort claims to silence criticism and commentary by the defendant, Joseph Foreman (Afroman), regarding a police search of his home. The ACLU contends that the statements and videos at issue are protected by the First Amendment and do not constitute actionable torts such as invasion of privacy, misappropriation, or false light publicity.

This filing is a motion by Bruce Rivers, an out-of-state attorney, seeking permission to appear pro hac vice as counsel for Defendant Joseph Foreman in the Court of Common Pleas, Adams County, Ohio. The motion includes supporting affidavits, a certificate of pro hac vice registration, and a certificate of service. It details compliance with Ohio rules and the association of local counsel.

This notice informs the parties that a telephone pretrial/scheduling conference has been scheduled for April 20, 2023, at 8:30am in the Adams County Common Pleas Court. It provides instructions for counsel and lists the parties to be notified.

This is a journal entry in which Judge Brett M. Spencer recuses himself from the case due to a conflict of interest and directs that a request be made to the Supreme Court of Ohio to appoint another judge for further proceedings.

This document is an email request from attorney Robert Klingler to the Adams County Courts clerk, seeking a copy of the jury selection questions and answers from the morning of March 16, 2026, in the case of Cooley v. Foreman. The request asks for expedited production and specifies a preference for electronic delivery.

This document provides the jury instructions for the case of Cooley, et. al. v. Foreman, et. al., outlining the legal standards, burdens of proof, definitions, and procedures the jury must follow in deliberating claims of defamation and invasion of privacy (false light). It explains the elements of each claim, the standards for evaluating evidence, and the process for reaching a verdict and awarding damages. The instructions also include guidance on jury deliberations and the responsibilities of jurors.

This is a judgment entry from the Adams County, Ohio Common Pleas Court, ordering the voluntary dismissal of all claims against Media Access, Inc. upon oral application by the plaintiffs' attorney during trial. The entry notes that not all claims in the case have been decided and that this is not a final appealable order.

This order grants WCPO Channel 9 permission to record and photograph court proceedings in the case, subject to certain limitations regarding courtroom access, decorum, and restrictions on photographing jurors and witnesses. The court retains authority to modify or revoke this permission as needed.

This filing is a memorandum in opposition submitted by Defendant Joseph Edgar Foreman, through his attorney, contesting the Plaintiffs' Supplemental Motion in Limine. The memorandum argues that the Plaintiffs' motion is vague, lacks specificity, and seeks to improperly restrict the defense's ability to present its case. The document requests that the court deny the Plaintiffs' Supplemental Motion in Limine.

This is a motion in limine filed by Defendant Joseph Edgar Foreman seeking to exclude the testimony and report of Detective Michael Robinson from trial, or alternatively, to continue the trial to allow time for deposition. The motion argues that the late disclosure of the witness and report constitutes a discovery violation that prejudiced the defense. Supporting memorandum and proof of service are included.

This filing is a request by a media agency representative for permission to record and photograph court proceedings in the case of Shawn D. Cooley et al. v. Joseph E. Foreman et al. The court grants the request, subject to compliance with local rules and any additional court orders.

This is a court order granting Pistils Production & Co. permission to record and photograph proceedings in the case, with specific limitations on the type of media allowed and conduct in the courtroom. The order outlines restrictions such as only allowing still photography, prohibiting audio/video recording and streaming, and maintaining courtroom decorum. The court reserves the right to modify or revoke this permission.

This document is a media request application seeking permission to broadcast, stream, photograph, or record courtroom proceedings in the case of Shawn D. Cooley, et al. vs. Joseph Edgar Foreman. The request is made by a media representative and references compliance with Ohio Superintendency Rule 12.

This document is a joint stipulation by the plaintiffs and defendants agreeing to the authenticity of certain exhibits, including social media posts, music, videos, law enforcement records, and other evidence. The parties agree not to object to these exhibits on authenticity grounds but reserve all other objections. The stipulation is signed by attorneys for both sides.

Plaintiffs move to exclude certain evidence and witnesses proposed by Defendant as irrelevant or unfairly prejudicial, including music videos, a flyer, and certain testimony. The motion requests that the court issue limiting instructions for some exhibits and exclude others entirely to prevent confusion or prejudice at trial. The filing is supported by a memorandum detailing the specific evidence and grounds for exclusion.

This document is an amended witness and exhibit list filed by Defendant Joseph Edgar Foreman for an upcoming jury trial. It lists proposed witnesses and exhibits for the defense, reserves the right to supplement the lists, and includes a certificate of service indicating how the document was served on opposing counsel.

This document is a praecipe requesting the Clerk of Courts to issue a subpoena on behalf of the defendant in the case of Shawn D. Cooley et al. vs. Joseph Edgar Foreman et al. in the Adams County Court of Common Pleas, Ohio.

This document is a subpoena issued in a civil case in Adams County, Ohio, commanding an individual to appear at the Adams County Court of Common Pleas on specified dates to testify and/or produce documents. It specifies the place, dates, and times for appearance, and is signed by the attorney for the defendant.

This filing presents the proposed jury instructions submitted by Defendant Joseph Edgar Foreman for use at the upcoming jury trial. The instructions cover the legal standards for defamation, invasion of privacy (false light and unreasonable publicity), and related defenses, as well as guidance on damages and burden of proof. The document is submitted by defense counsel and includes a certificate of service to opposing counsel.

This filing lists the proposed witnesses for the defense in the upcoming jury trial, submitted by Defendant Joseph Edgar Foreman through his attorney. It includes named individuals, a records custodian, and reserves the right to supplement the list. The document also contains a proof of service section indicating how and to whom the notice was served.

This document lists the proposed trial exhibits for Defendant Joseph Edgar Foreman, including search warrants, depositions, videos, and other materials. It is submitted by his attorney and includes a certificate of service indicating that copies were provided to opposing counsel. The document also certifies that no artificial intelligence was used in its preparation.

This is a judgment entry from the Adams County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas granting the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment. The order dismisses the defendants' counterclaims for conversion, trespass to chattels, illegal search and seizure, and frivolous conduct, finding no genuine issues of material fact and that plaintiffs are entitled to immunity. The decision is not a final appealable order.

This order, issued by the Adams County Court of Common Pleas, strikes all pleadings filed on behalf of Media Access, Inc. because they were signed by Adam Corey Muniz, who is not licensed to practice law in Ohio. The court declares these pleadings a nullity, taxes costs to Media Access, Inc. and Adam Corey Muniz, and states that this is a final appealable order.

This filing is a brief submitted by the Plaintiffs in response to a court order regarding the Defendant's counterclaims. It addresses the statute of limitations applicable to each of the Defendant's counterclaims, argues that some are time-barred or lack sufficient temporal allegations, and requests dismissal of certain counts. The brief also discusses the nature of the counterclaims as permissive and not arising from the same transaction or occurrence as the Plaintiffs' claims.

This is a court order denying the Defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to join necessary parties. The court finds that dismissal is not warranted due to the lack of harm to Defendants and the expiration of the statute of limitations for potential additional parties. The order directs that only damages suffered by the named Plaintiffs are relevant for trial.

This filing is the Plaintiffs' reply in support of their partial motion for summary judgment on the defendant's counterclaims. Plaintiffs argue there are no genuine issues of material fact, that they are entitled to qualified and statutory immunity, and that the defendant's claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, conversion, and trespass to chattel lack legal basis and should be dismissed.

This filing is a response by Defendant Joseph Edgar Foreman, through his attorney, to a Judgment Entry by Judge Jonathan P. Hein requesting clarification of the legal basis for the defendant's claims under Ohio law. The document provides legal argument and case law regarding claims of trespass to chattels, conversion, and deprivation of rights, and includes a memorandum in support. It also contains a certificate of service indicating service to opposing counsel and parties.

The court issues an order converting a previously scheduled settlement conference to a telephone conference to be held on February 23, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. The order addresses logistical considerations and outlines the topics to be discussed during the call.

This is a court order clarifying the legal standards and elements applicable to the Defendants' causes of action, specifically referencing Ohio law on conversion and trespass to chattels. The order instructs that jury instructions will be based on the cited case law and provides Defendants' counsel an opportunity to object if they believe this is inaccurate.

This is a court order directing the Defendants' counsel to provide a clearer articulation of the legal basis for their counterclaims, specifically regarding conversion and trespass, and to file a responsive briefing by January 27, 2025. The order discusses the inadequacy of the current counterclaims and references relevant legal standards and jury instructions.

This filing notifies the court and parties that Daniel T. Downey is substituting in as trial counsel for the Plaintiffs, replacing David C. Moser, while Sara L. McElroy remains as co-counsel. The notice requests the Clerk to update the docket and directs future pleadings to the new counsel. A certificate of service is included, indicating service by email on January 20, 2026.

This document is a notice from the court indicating its intent to rule on the defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to join necessary parties. The court sets a deadline for responsive pleadings and states that the motion will be considered on the pleadings unless good cause is shown for an evidentiary hearing.

This filing is Defendant Joseph Edgar Foreman's response to the Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment regarding the defendant's counterclaims. The response argues that there are material facts in dispute that should be presented to a jury, and includes a memorandum in support detailing the events and legal arguments related to the search of Mr. Foreman's residence and the actions of law enforcement officers. The document addresses issues of qualified immunity, Fourth Amendment protections, Ohio state law immunities, and claims related to property damage, conversion, trespass, missing money, and alleged frivolous conduct.

This is a motion filed by Defendant Joseph Edgar Foreman seeking dismissal of the case on the grounds that the Plaintiffs failed to add or join necessary parties who may have claims or rights affected by the litigation. The motion cites deposition testimony indicating that Plaintiffs are seeking damages on behalf of individuals not named as parties, and argues that under Ohio law, these individuals must be joined for complete adjudication. The motion requests the court to dismiss the case pursuant to Ohio Rule of Civil Procedure 12(B)(7).

This order sets a briefing schedule regarding the Plaintiffs' pending motion for summary judgment. It establishes deadlines for the opposing parties to file a response and for the Plaintiffs to file a reply, after which the matter will be submitted for decision without a hearing unless additional time is granted.

This notice informs the court and parties that the plaintiffs are filing several deposition transcripts and exhibits in the case. It lists the names of the deponents, the dates of their depositions, and includes a certificate of service indicating that the notice was served by email to counsel for the parties.

This document contains the deposition transcript of Lisa Phillips, a plaintiff, taken by the defendants' counsel on August 8, 2025, in Adams County, Ohio, as part of a civil lawsuit. The transcript covers her employment history, actions during a search warrant execution, the aftermath including social media posts and alleged reputational harm, emotional distress, and humiliation, as well as the impact on her personal and professional life. The document also includes an index providing a keyword-based reference to topics, names, and terms discussed during the deposition, along with page and line numbers for each entry.

This is a court order extending the deadline for Defendants to respond to an anticipated motion for summary judgment by Plaintiffs to January 16, 2026. Plaintiffs are permitted to file any response within 10 days after Defendants' response. The order does not extend any other deadlines.

This document is a joint agreement between the parties to extend the dispositive motions deadline to January 16, 2026, due to the health issues of Attorney David Osborne, Jr. It also sets a new date for the Plaintiff to file a Motion for Summary Judgment and the corresponding response deadline.

Judge Jerry McBride recuses himself from the case for personal and health reasons. The court will request the Supreme Court of Ohio to assign a new visiting judge. The clerk is instructed to deliver a copy of this entry to counsel and unrepresented parties.

This is an agreed order granting the parties' joint motion to extend the deadline for filing motions for summary judgment. The new deadline for such motions is set for December 5, 2025.

This is a joint motion filed by both plaintiffs and defendants requesting an extension of the deadline for filing motions for summary judgment. The parties propose to move the deadline from November 14, 2025, to December 5, 2025, to allow additional time for discovery and review of materials.

This document appears to be a returned mail envelope or cover sheet related to a court filing, indicating that the mail was returned to sender due to an insufficient address and unable to forward. It includes postal markings, addresses, and a case number.

This order extends the discovery deadline in the case until October 31, 2025, pursuant to the joint motion and agreement of the parties.

This is a joint agreement filed by the parties to extend the discovery deadline in the case until October 31, 2025, due to pending discovery responses.

This is the deposition transcript of Shawn Grooms, an officer with the Adams County Sheriff's Office, taken on August 8, 2025. The deposition covers his employment history, involvement in a search warrant execution on August 21, 2022, the aftermath including alleged reputational and emotional damages, and his responses to questions about the case and related events.

This document is the deposition transcript of Randolph Walters, a sergeant with the Adams County Sheriff's Office, taken on August 8, 2025, in Hamilton County, Ohio. The deposition covers his employment history, training, duties, and specific involvement in a search warrant operation on October 21, 2022, as well as his experiences of emotional distress, threats, and reputational harm allegedly suffered due to actions and statements by others. It also discusses departmental procedures, use of body cameras, evidence handling, and the impact of public perception and social media.

This document is a notice informing parties of the scheduled depositions of several individuals in the case of Shawn Cooley et al. vs. Joseph Edgar Foreman et al. The depositions are to take place on August 6 and August 8, 2025, at a specified location, and all counsel are invited to attend. The document includes a certificate of service listing the recipients and methods of service.

This filing is a notice by the plaintiffs to take the deposition of defendant Joseph Foreman on August 6, 2025, at the Law Offices of David Osborne, Jr., LLC. It includes details of the deposition and a certificate of service indicating how notice was provided to opposing counsel.

This is an agreed order granting the parties' joint motion to extend the case schedule, setting new deadlines for discovery, expert reports, motions, pretrial conference, and trial in the case.

This is an agreed order granting the parties' joint motion to continue the jury trial previously scheduled for June 2025. The case is removed from the upcoming trial calendar, and the final pretrial conference remains set for May 19, 2025. The court will discuss new deadlines with the parties at that time.

This Notice of Appearance informs the court and parties that Sara L. McElroy is entering her appearance as co-counsel for Plaintiffs as to the Counterclaim and requests to be added to the service list. The filing includes a certificate of service indicating service by email and/or regular mail on May 13, 2025.

This is a joint motion filed by both Plaintiffs and Defendants requesting an extension of the case schedule to allow for additional discovery, submission of dispositive motions, and scheduling of trial. The motion proposes new deadlines for discovery, expert reports, summary judgment motions, and trial, and affirms that the extension is requested in good faith.

This order denies the plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the pleadings regarding the defendants' counterclaims. The court finds that there are triable issues of fact concerning whether the plaintiffs acted outside the scope of their employment or with malicious intent, and thus the motion is overruled. The order addresses counterclaims related to property damage, conversion, civil rights violations, and illegal search and seizure.

This journal entry from the Adams County Court of Common Pleas advances the Judgment On The Pleadings Hearing from January 24, 2025 to December 2, 2024 at 3:30pm, to be conducted via Zoom. It also directs Attorney Robert Klinger to send the meeting invitation and preserve the recording, and instructs the clerk to deliver a copy to counsel and unrepresented parties.

This is a journal entry from the Court of Common Pleas, Adams County, Ohio, continuing a previously scheduled hearing on Judgment on the Pleadings from November 15, 2024, to January 24, 2025, due to the unavailability of Judge Jerry R. McBride. The hearing will be conducted via video, and the clerk is instructed to notify counsel and unrepresented parties.

This order grants the motion to withdraw Helen K. Sudhoff as co-counsel for the Plaintiffs as to Counterclaims, with David C. Moser remaining as trial counsel for Plaintiffs as to Counterclaims.

This is a journal entry from the Adams County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas Civil Division, scheduling a hearing on Plaintiff's Motion For Judgment on the Pleadings for November 15, 2024, at 10:00am. The entry instructs all counsel to be present and directs the clerk to deliver a copy to counsel and unrepresented parties.

This filing is Plaintiffs' reply in support of their motion for judgment on the pleadings regarding Defendants' counterclaims. Plaintiffs argue that Defendants have failed to substantively oppose their claims of immunity and other defenses, and that the counterclaims lack legal and factual basis. Plaintiffs request the court to grant judgment on the pleadings in their favor as to all counterclaims.

This filing is Plaintiffs' reply in support of their motion for judgment on the pleadings regarding Defendants' counterclaims. Plaintiffs argue that Defendants have failed to substantively oppose their claims of immunity and other defenses, and that judgment on the pleadings is warranted. The reply also addresses the voluntary dismissal of certain counterclaims, the lack of a viable Fourth Amendment claim, and the absence of a legal basis for claims of frivolous conduct or for Hungry Hustler Records' counterclaims.

This is a court order dismissing Counterclaims 9, 10, and 11 of Defendant Joseph E. Foreman and Hungry Hustler Records without prejudice, pursuant to Rule 41(A)(1)(b) of the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure. The order is signed by Judge Jerry McBride and directs that a file-stamped copy be provided to each party and their legal counsel.

This is a court order dismissing Counterclaims 9, 10, and 11 of Defendant Joseph E. Foreman and Hungry Hustler Records without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(A)(1)(b) of the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure. The order is signed by Judge Jerry McBride and directs that a file-stamped copy be provided to all parties and their counsel.

This is an unopposed motion filed by the Plaintiffs requesting a brief extension of time, until July 8, 2024, to file their reply in support of their pending motion for judgment on the pleadings. The motion cites the July 4 holiday and staff schedules as reasons for the request, and notes that Defendants do not object. A certificate of service is included, indicating service by email on July 1, 2024.

This filing is the Defendants' response to the Plaintiffs' motion for judgment on the pleadings regarding the Defendants' counterclaims. The Defendants argue that the Plaintiffs are not entitled to immunity for their actions and that factual disputes remain which preclude judgment on the pleadings. The response includes legal analysis, factual background, and a memorandum in support, and requests denial of the Plaintiffs' motion.

This is a motion filed by Defendants Joseph E. Foreman and Hungry Hustler Records requesting the court to dismiss their own counterclaims 9, 10, and 11 without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(A)(1)(b) of the Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure. The filing includes a certificate of service indicating service on opposing counsel.

This filing is a response by Defendants Joseph E. Foreman and Hungry Hustler Records to Plaintiffs' Motion to Stay Discovery, indicating Defendants' consent to stay all counterclaim discovery until the court rules on Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings.

Defendants Joseph E. Foreman and Hungry Hustler Records request the court to set an oral hearing regarding the Plaintiffs' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings as it relates to the Defendants' counterclaims. The filing includes a certificate of service indicating service on opposing counsel.

This is a joint stipulated protective order entered by agreement of the parties and signed by the judge. It governs the designation, use, and disclosure of confidential and attorney-eyes only materials in discovery and at trial, and sets forth procedures for challenging designations, filing under seal, and handling materials at the conclusion of litigation. The order is binding on all parties and their counsel and may be modified by the court.

This is a civil case scheduling order issued by the court, setting forth deadlines and procedures for discovery, motions, mediation, expert reports, pretrial conference, and jury trial. It adopts the parties' proposed discovery plan, establishes key dates for filings and trial preparation, and outlines requirements for resolving discovery disputes and serving documents. The order is signed by Retired Judge Jerry R. McBride.

This filing is a motion by the plaintiffs requesting the court to adopt a proposed joint stipulated protective order, which is attached as an exhibit. The motion explains the necessity of the protective order for discovery due to the potential disclosure of confidential information, and includes the full text of the proposed order, as well as a certificate of service. The order sets forth procedures for designating, handling, and challenging confidential and attorney-eyes-only information in the case.

This document is a joint Rule 26(F) conference report and proposed discovery plan submitted by all parties in the case. It outlines the agreed discovery schedule, topics for discovery, deadlines, and procedures for handling electronically stored information, public records, and privilege issues. The filing includes a certificate of service indicating service on all counsel of record.

This document is a notice from the Supreme Court of Ohio's Office of Bar Admissions informing the Adams County Court of Common Pleas that Bruce Rivers, an out-of-state attorney, has been automatically excluded from practicing law in Ohio due to failure to comply with pro hac vice registration requirements for 2024. The notice explains the reason for exclusion and the process for reinstatement.

This order corrects a clerical error in a previous entry regarding attorney Vera Eidelman's pro hac vice admission. It clarifies that Eidelman was granted permission to appear pro hac vice but was not granted permission to participate as co-counsel for defendant Joseph Edgar Foreman. The order affirms the correct portions of the previous entry and conditions Eidelman's appearance on compliance with local rules.

This is a court order from the Adams County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas granting the motion for attorneys Bruce Rivers and Tyler Cantrell to withdraw as counsel of record for the defendants. The order confirms that all relevant parties have signed the motion and includes a certificate of service indicating the motion was served by electronic mail.

This filing is a Notice of Appearance by Attorney David S. Osborne, Jr. as lead counsel for Defendants Joseph Foreman and Hungry Hustler Records in the case. It requests that all service be directed to him and includes a certificate of service listing all parties served by mail.

This filing is the Defendants' response to the Plaintiffs' memorandum opposing the Defendants' motion for leave to amend their counterclaims. It explains the procedural history, addresses service issues, and requests that the court grant leave to file an amended counterclaim. The document includes a memorandum in support and a certificate of service.

Defendants Joseph E. Foreman and Hungry Hustler Records move to strike the Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint, arguing it was filed out of time and without the court's permission. The motion discusses the relevant procedural rules and asserts that the amendment was improper. A certificate of service is included, listing all parties served and the methods of service.

This is a motion filed by Bruce Rivers and Tyler Cantrell, attorneys for the Defendants, requesting permission to withdraw as counsel because the Defendants have retained new counsel, David Osborne. The motion states that both the Defendants and their current counsel agree to the withdrawal.

This filing is a memorandum by the Plaintiffs opposing the Defendants' motion for leave to amend their counterclaims. Plaintiffs argue that Defendants have not provided sufficient justification or details for the requested amendments and ask the court to deny the motion. The memorandum includes legal arguments and cites relevant case law, and it is accompanied by a certificate of service indicating service by email to opposing counsel and other parties.

This filing is a memorandum by the plaintiffs opposing the defendants' motion for leave to amend their counterclaims. Plaintiffs argue that defendants have not provided sufficient justification or details for the requested amendments and ask the court to deny the motion. The memorandum includes legal arguments and a certificate of service.

This is a motion filed by Defendants Joseph E. Foreman and Hungry Hustler Records seeking leave of court to file an Amended Answer and Counterclaim. The motion argues that the amendment is necessary to add new affirmative defenses and causes of action, and that leave should be granted in the interest of justice. A memorandum in support and a certificate of service are included.

This filing is the Plaintiffs' formal answer to the Defendants' Counterclaim in the case. Plaintiffs deny most of the allegations, assert several affirmative defenses, and request that the Counterclaim be dismissed with prejudice. The document includes a certificate of service and a jury demand.

This filing is the Defendants' Answer and Counterclaim in response to the Plaintiffs' Amended and Supplemental Complaint. It contains admissions, denials, and affirmative defenses to the allegations, as well as multiple counterclaims against the Plaintiffs, including claims for conversion, trespass to chattels, illegal search and seizure, First Amendment retaliation, abuse of process, and tortious interference with business relationships. The Defendants seek damages, attorney fees, and injunctive relief.

This is a court order from the Adams County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas, Civil Division, addressing defendants' motions to dismiss and to strike in a civil case involving claims of unauthorized use of persona, invasion of privacy, and defamation. The court grants the motion to dismiss as to Counts 1 and 2, entering judgment of dismissal for those counts, but denies the motion as to Counts 3, 4, and 5, allowing those claims to proceed. The order also provides guidance to counsel regarding specificity in future filings and reserves consideration of injunctive relief until after a determination on the merits.

This filing is a supplemental memorandum submitted by the plaintiffs in opposition to the defendants' amended joint motion to dismiss and motion to strike the plaintiffs' amended and supplemental complaint. It provides additional examples of alleged defamatory statements made by the defendants and argues for the denial of the defendants' motions. The memorandum also references the possibility of seeking a restraining order against the defendants for further alleged defamation.

This filing is the Defendants' reply brief to the Plaintiffs' memorandum in opposition to Defendants' Amended Joint Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Strike Plaintiffs' Amended and Supplemental Complaint. It argues that the Plaintiffs' claims are vague, insufficient, and should be dismissed, and includes a certificate of service.

This filing is a joint motion by Defendants Joseph Edgar Foreman and Hungry Hustler Records seeking dismissal of all claims in the Plaintiffs' Amended and Supplemental Complaint for failure to state a claim under Ohio law, and to strike the claims as insufficient and redundant. The motion argues that the Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the First Amendment and do not meet the legal standards for the alleged causes of action. The memorandum in support provides legal arguments and cites relevant case law.

This order grants attorney Vera Eidelman permission to appear pro hac vice in the case of Cooley v. Foreman. The order specifies that Eidelman is admitted as co-counsel for the defendant, conditioned on association with an Ohio attorney and compliance with local rules. The order also directs the Clerk to serve copies to all counsel and parties and instructs the Assignment Commissioner to notify Eidelman of scheduled events.

The court denies Arthur West's motion to intervene in the case, finding his interests are adequately represented by existing parties. The court grants leave to Arthur West, the American Civil Liberties Union, and the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio Foundation to file amicus curiae briefs. The order allows parties to respond to these briefs without further court approval.

This is a first amended and supplemental complaint filed by several Adams County law enforcement officers against Joseph Edgar Foreman (aka Afroman) and others. Plaintiffs allege unauthorized commercial use of their personas, invasion of privacy, defamation, and seek damages and injunctive relief. The complaint details the alleged conduct, including the use of plaintiffs' images in music videos and social media, and requests monetary and injunctive remedies.

This filing is a motion by Vera Eidelman, an out-of-state attorney, seeking permission to appear pro hac vice as co-counsel for amici curiae in the case of Shawn D. Cooley et al. v. Joseph Edgar Foreman et al. It includes supporting affidavits, certificates, and a certificate of service to all parties.

This order grants the motion for admission pro hac vice for attorney Bruce Rivers, allowing him to appear as co-counsel for the defendant Joseph Edgar Foreman, aka Afroman, in the case, subject to certain conditions.

This motion is filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and the ACLU of Ohio seeking leave to file an amicus curiae brief in support of the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. The motion argues that the case has significant First Amendment implications and that the proposed amicus brief will aid the Court by providing additional analysis regarding free speech and privacy torts under Ohio law.

This filing is a Notice of Appearance by attorneys David J. Carey, Amy R. Gilbert, and Freda J. Levenson, entering their appearance as counsel for proposed amici curiae the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union. It also includes a certificate of service indicating how and when the document was served to other parties.

This memorandum is filed by Arthur West in support of his motion to intervene in the case of Shawn D. Cooley, et al. v. Joseph E. Foreman, et al. West argues that he has a First Amendment interest in the receipt of the music videos and materials at issue, that his interests are not adequately represented by the existing parties, and that intervention is warranted under Ohio Rule of Civil Procedure 24. The filing also includes a declaration of service indicating that the memorandum was served on counsel for the parties by email on April 17, 2023.

This document is a certificate from the Supreme Court of Ohio assigning retired Judge Jerry R. McBride to preside over a specific case in the Adams County Court of Common Pleas, effective March 27, 2023.

This document is a letter from Music Access, Inc. acknowledging receipt of a summons in Case No. CVH20230069 in Adams County Common Pleas Court. The letter requests removal from the case on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction and denies legal accountability regarding Joseph Edgar Foreman p/k/a "Afroman".

This document is a court-issued summons notifying the defendants that a complaint has been filed against them in the Adams County Common Pleas Court. It instructs the defendants to respond to the complaint within a specified period and provides the plaintiff's attorney's contact information.

This is a civil complaint filed by several plaintiffs, all law enforcement officers, against Joseph Edgar Foreman (aka Afroman), Hungry Hustler Records, Media Access Inc., and several John Doe defendants. The complaint alleges unauthorized commercial use of the plaintiffs' personas, invasion of privacy, false light publicity, and unreasonable publicity of private lives, and seeks damages and injunctive relief to prevent further violations.

This order grants the motion of Bruce Rivers and Tyler Cantrell to withdraw as attorneys of record for the defendants, noting that the defendants have agreed to the withdrawal and have retained other counsel. The clerk is directed to send copies of the order to all counsel of record.