BROWN v. CAMDEN et al, No. 2:2010cv00063 - Document 26 (D. Me. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE re: 7 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; 15 Motion to Dismiss; 16 Motion for Preliminary Injunction; 21 Report and Recommendations. for 21 Report and Recommended Decision, [1 2] Motion to Dismiss, Motion to Strike, Motion for filed by CAMDEN, TOWN OF, 16 Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by CRAIG A BROWN, 15 Motion to Dismiss filed by LINDSAY JONES, GEOFF RUSHLAU, 7 Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by CRAIG A BROWN By JUDGE GEORGE Z. SINGAL. (mjlt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT District of Maine CRAIG A. BROWN, Plaintiff v. CAMDEN, TOWN OF, et al., Defendant ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil No. 10-63-P-S ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE The United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court on April 6, 2010 her Recommended Decision (Docket No. 21). Plaintiff filed his Objection to the Recommended Decision (Docket No. 22), and his Amended Objection to the Recommended Decision (Docket No. 23) on April 20, 2010. Defendant Town of Camden filed its Response to Plaintiff s Objection to the Recommended Decision (Docket No. 24) on April 28, 2010. Defendants Rushlau and Jones filed their Response to Plaintiff s Objection to the Recommended Decision (Docket No. 25) on April 28, 2010. I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision, together with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision; and I concur with the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in her Recommended Decision, and determine that no further proceeding is necessary. 1. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is hereby AFFIRMED. 2. It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant Town of Camden s Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 12) is GRANTED. 3. It is hereby ORDERED that Defendants Rushlau s and Jones Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 15) is GRANTED. 4. It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff s federal claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 5. It is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff s Motions for Injunction (Docket Nos. 7 and 16) are DISMISSED AS MOOT. 6. The Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff s state law claims. /s/George Z. Singal_____________ U.S. District Judge Dated: May 10, 2010
]]>
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.
