HANSON v. CORRECTIONAL HEALTH PARTNERS LLC et al, No. 1:2019cv00393 - Document 45 (D. Me. 2020)
Court Description: ORDER ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE re: 30 Report and Recommendations: granting in part and denying in part as moot 8 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; denying as moot 9 Motion to Dismiss. By JUDGE JON D. LEVY (aks)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
HANSON v. CORRECTIONAL HEALTH PARTNERS LLC et al Doc. 45 Case 1:19-cv-00393-JDL Document 45 Filed 07/20/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 191 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE RONALD HANSON, Plaintiff, v. CORRECTIONAL HEALTH PARTNERS, LLC, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) 1:19-cv-00393-JDL ) ) ) ) ) ORDER ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE Ronald Hanson brings this action for alleged violations of his rights under state and federal law arising out of medical treatment allegedly administered to him at the Kennebec County Correctional Facility on October 2, 2015. Defendants Correctional Health Partners, LLC, Jeff Archambeau, Dr. Jennifer Mix, Dee Butler, and Dr. Teresa Mayer (collectively, the “CHP Defendants”) move to dismiss the vicarious liability claims asserted in Counts One through Four of Hanson’s complaint and to dismiss Counts Five through Ten entirely (ECF No. 8). Defendant Kimberly Vigue separately moves to dismiss Counts Five through Ten of the complaint (ECF No. 9). United States Magistrate Judge John C. Nivison filed his Recommended Decision on the motions to dismiss with the Court on February 28, 2020 (ECF No. 30), pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West 2020) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). The time within which to file objections has expired, and no objections have been filed. Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:19-cv-00393-JDL Document 45 Filed 07/20/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 192 The Magistrate Judge provided notice that a party’s failure to object would waive the right to de novo review and appeal. I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge’s Recommended Decision, together with the entire record and have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge’s Recommended Decision. I concur with the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in his Recommended Decision and determine that no further proceeding is necessary. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 30) of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ACCEPTED. The CHP Defendants’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 8) is GRANTED IN PART, as to the vicarious liability claims contained in Counts One through Four of the complaint, and DENIED IN PART as moot, as to Counts Five through Ten of the complaint. Additionally, Defendant Vigue’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 9) is DENIED as moot. SO ORDERED. Dated this 20th day of July, 2020. /s/ Jon D. Levy CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
]]>
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.
