Hanson v. Rockingham County Department of Corrections, Superintendent
ORDER Directing US Marshal to Make Service. Clerk's Office is directed to prepare a summons for defendant Lennon and forward to U.S. Marshal's office, together with copies of the documents indicated in the order, to effect service upon defendant Lennon. Defendant Lennon is to answer within 21 days of service; Defendant Haseltine is to answer to the allegations/claims set forth in motion to amend and supplement the complaint within 21 days of the date of this order. ( Answer Follow Up on 9/25/2012.) So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Landya B. McCafferty.(jab)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Civil No. 11-cv-534-SM
Stephen Church, Superintendent,
Rockingham County House of
Corrections, et al.
O R D E R
Before the court is pro se plaintiff Michael Hanson’s
motion to amend his complaint (doc. no. 39).
The motion was
filed by Hanson while he was incarcerated at the Rockingham
County House of Corrections (“RCHC”).1
The matter is before this
magistrate judge for a ruling on the motion, and an initial
review to determine whether it states any claim upon which
relief might be granted, pursuant to United States District
Court District of New Hampshire Local Rule (“LR”) 4.3(d)(2).
For the reasons explained herein and in a report and
recommendation issued simultaneously with this order
(hereinafter “the R&R”), the motion is granted.
Since the filing of this motion, plaintiff has been
released from custody.
Motion to Amend
Hanson’s “Motion to Amend Complaint” (doc. no. 39) seeks,
in part, to amend one claim that was insufficiently stated in
his original complaint (doc. nos. 1 and 8), and that he had been
directed to amend in orders issued January 12, 2012 (doc. no.
18) and February 2, 2012 (doc. no. 27).
That portion of the
motion is properly considered a request to amend the complaint.
Hanson, however, asserts additional claims arising out of
events that occurred at the RCHC after the commencement of this
action, but that, as alleged, relate to the original pleadings
To that extent, the motion is in the nature of a
supplemental pleading filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(d).
See id. (the court may permit supplemental pleading “setting out
any transaction, occurrence, or event that happened after the
date of the pleading to be supplemented” even if original
pleading is defective).
The motion to amend and supplement contains one claim upon
which the court has found relief may be granted.
court finds that Hanson has asserted facts in the supplemental
pleading that connect it to the original pleading.
reasons, the Clerk’s office is directed to amend the docket to
rename the motion as “Motion to Amend and Supplement Complaint.”
The motion, so construed, is granted.2
As explained in the R&R, Hanson has stated a claim upon
which relief might be granted alleging a violation of the Fourth
Amendment against RCHC Corrections Officer Lennon.
the court directs that service of this action be made on Lennon
at his place of business: Rockingham County House of
Corrections, 99 North Rd., Brentwood, NH 03833.
The clerk’s office is directed to prepare a summons form
for defendant Lennon.
The clerk’s office shall forward to the
U.S. Marshal’s office the summons, along with: the complaint
(doc. nos. 1 and 8); the Orders issued November 21, 2011 (doc.
no. 11), January 12, 2012 (doc. no. 18), January 31, 2012 (doc.
no. 24), February 2, 2012 (doc. no. 27), February 14, 2012 (doc.
no. 29), February 17, 2012 (doc. no. 31), and April 12, 2012
(doc. no. 39); and the Report and Recommendations issued January
12, 2012 (doc. no. 19), August 16, 2012 (doc. no. 48) and this
Granting this motion does not serve to authorize the claims
therein to proceed. Like all prisoner civil rights actions, the
pleading is subject to preliminary review. See 28 U.S.C. §
1915A(a); LR 4.3(d)(2). Granting the motion allows the document
to be so reviewed.
date; and this Order.
Upon receipt of the necessary
documentation, the U.S. Marshal’s office shall effect service
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) and 4(e).
Defendant Lennon is instructed to answer or otherwise plead
within twenty-one days of service.
See Fed. R. Civ. P.
Defendant Haseltine has previously filed an answer (doc.
no. 30) to the complaint (doc. nos. 1 and 8).
directed to answer or otherwise plead in response to the
allegations and claims set forth in the motion to amend and
supplement the complaint (doc. no. 39), as identified in the
R&R, within twenty-one days of the date of this Order.
Hanson is instructed that all future pleadings, written
motions, notices, or similar papers shall be served directly on
defendants by delivering or mailing the materials to them or
their attorney(s), pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b).
United States Magistrate Judge
September 4, 2012
Michael Hanson, pro se
Corey Belobrow, Esq.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.