Henise v. Sabol et al
| Craig A. Henise |
| Mary Sabol, Claire Doll, Captain John Daryman, Officer Steven Bolding, Officer Jose Francisco, Officer Jay Lawrence, Chris Jenson, Jen Miosi, Toby Catone, Robin Rochow, Dr. Pamela Rollings and Patrick Gallagher |
| 1:2010cv01775 |
| August 24, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania |
| Harrisburg Office |
| York |
| Martin C. Carlson |
| Yvette Kane |
| Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
48
ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Court ADOPTS the REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 47 of MJ Carlson. Pltf's complaint is dismissed. The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this file. Signed by Chief Judge Yvette Kane on March 16, 2011. (sc)
|
|
Filing
44
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 1) The REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 41 is ADOPTED. 2)Dfts' Mtns to Dismiss are GRANTED. (see order) 3)Pltf shall file a 2nd amdcmp by 2/22/11. 4)Pltf's Mtn to Clarify and Explain which is cons trued as obj to R&R is OVERRULED. 5)Pltf's Mtn of Consolidated Response which is construed as a response in opp to mtns to dismiss is OVERRULED. 35 40 42 31 26 6)The case is referred back to Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson.Signed by Chief Judge Yvette Kane on Jan. 6, 2011. (sc)
|
|
Filing
41
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - IT IS RECOMMENDED that the dfts motions to dismiss (Docs. 26 , 31 , and 35 ) be GRANTED, and that the following claims be dismissed with prejudice: (1) The legally insufficient HIPAA claim, and (2) the claims against co rrectional staff arising out of the 2008 incident, which Henise failed to properly grieve through this prison system. As for the remaining claims, it is recommended that the Court provide the pltf with an opportunity to correct the many deficiencies in the pro se complaint, by dismissing these remaining allegations without prejudice to one final effort by the pltf to comply with the rules governing civil actions in federal court. Given these recommendations, Henises document styled motion of c onsolidated response to the dfts motions to dismiss (Doc. 40), which is in reality not a motion, but rather a response in opposition to the dfts motions, should be DISMISSED. Objections to R&R due by 12/31/2010. Signed by Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson on December 14, 2010. (kjn)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Pennsylvania Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
