LeFors v. Langston et al

Filing 7

ORDER dismissing without prejudice LeFor's complaint. LeFors's petition for a writ of mandamus to compel service in this case, 6 , is denied as moot. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order and accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 3/30/2015. (jak)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION HERMAN H. LEFORS, JR. ODOC #112524 v. PLAINTIFF No. 3:14-cv-276-DPM-JTR DAN LANGSTON, Sheriff, Greene County Arkansas; COLIN P. WALL, Attorney, Rainwater, Holt and Sexton, P A; DR. STEVEN M. BLANCHARD, Physician for Greene County Jail; SAMMIE JOHNSON, Nurse, Greene County Jail; and THOMAS MARSH, Compliance Officer, AMMC DEFENDANTS ORDER 1. LeFors has filed this prose action alleging that defendants violated the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1320d, and the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution when they fraudulently obtained copies of his private medical records before the execution of a medical release. The Court must screen LeFors's allegations. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. 2. LeFors's HIPPA and constitutional challenges to the production of his medical records have already been raised and addressed during discovery in LeFors v. Langston, 3:14-cv-138- KGB-JJV, NQ 60, 61, & 90, which is currently pending in this District. Any arguments LeFors wishes to make regarding the production of his medical records must be raised in that lawsuit to avoid unwarranted relitigation. 3. LeFors's complaint is dismissed without prejudice. Lefors's petition for a writ of mandamus to compel service in this case, NQ 6, is denied as moot. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order and accompanying Judgment will not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3). So Ordered. D.P. Marshall Jr. rY United States District Judge -2-

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.


Why Is My Information Online?