QUINN v. US PRISONER TRANSPORT INC et al, No. 2:2018cv00149 - Document 67 (D. Me. 2019)
Court Description: ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION AND ORDER OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE, AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT ROBINSON'S MOTION TO DISMISS THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT re 39 Report and Recommendations; 21 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; 42 Appeal from Magistrate Judge Decision to District Court; 44 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim By JUDGE D. BROCK HORNBY. (jib)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
QUINN v. US PRISONER TRANSPORT INC et al Doc. 67 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE MEGHAN NICOLE QUINN, PLAINTIFF V. U.S. PRISONER TRANSPORT, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL NO. 2:18-CV-149-DBH ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION AND ORDER OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE, AND ORDER ON DEFENDANT ROBINSON’S MOTION TO DISMISS THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT On January 17, 2019, the United States Magistrate Judge filed with the court, with copies to counsel, his Order on Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint and Recommended Decision on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 39). On January 31, 2019, the defendant Andrew Robinson filed an objection to the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 41), and an appeal of the Order on Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint (ECF No. 42). I have reviewed and considered the Recommended Decision, together with the entire record. I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Recommended Decision, and I concur with the recommendations and findings of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in the Recommended Decision, and determine that no further proceeding is necessary. Dockets.Justia.com I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge’s Order on Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint. I concur with the Magistrate Judge’s Order because it is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law, and determine that no further proceeding is necessary. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED. The defendant Robinson’s motion to dismiss is DENIED. The defendant Robinson’s objection is OVERRULED and the Magistrate Judge’s ruling on the Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint is AFFIRMED because the Order is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). The defendant Robinson’s motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 44) is DENIED for the reasons set forth in the earlier Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge. SO ORDERED. DATED THIS 3RD DAY OF APRIL, 2019 /S/D. BROCK HORNBY D. BROCK HORNBY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
