THOMAS, MD v. INDIANA PHYSICIAN MANAGEMENT LLC et al

Filing 60

ORDER - ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND ENTERING JUDGMENT; The Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation.The Court OVERRULES Dr. Thomas's objection. The plaintiff's motion to withdraw lawsuit Dkt. 54 is GRANTED. The defendants' motions for judgment on the pleadings Dkts. 38 and 45 are DENIED AS MOOT. A sanction, and JUDGMENT, in the amount of $500 is HEREBY ENTERED against plaintiff James Thomas, M.D. and in favor of defendant I ndiana Physician Management-Rush, LLC. This resolves the outstanding fees and sanctions issues addressed in Dkts. 53 and 55. The plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 4/13/2016. copy mailed.(CKM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
JAMES THOMAS, M.D.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
INDIANA PHYSICIAN MANAGEMENTRUSH, LLC,
ST. VINCENT RANDOLPH HOSPITAL
INC., and JOSHUA GEESY,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

1:15-cv-00640-SEB-DML

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
AND ENTERING JUDGMENT
On February 16, 2016, Magistrate Judge Lynch issued a Report and Recommendation
that the Court:
1. GRANT the plaintiff’s motion to withdraw lawsuit, at Dkt. 54, and dismiss the
plaintiff’s claims with prejudice.
2. DENY AS MOOT the defendants’ motions for judgment on the pleadings, at Dkts. 38
and 45.
3. ENTER a sanction in the amount of $500 against Dr. Thomas and in favor of
defendant Indiana Physician Management-Rush, LLC (“IPM”), in resolution of (a)
the outstanding attorneys’ fee issue from IPM’s motion to compel (see Dkts. 50 and
55) and (b) IPM’s motion for sanctions (Dkt. 53).
Plaintiff James Thomas, M.D. has filed a response to the Report and Recommendation, which
the Court treats as an objection. None of the other parties filed an objection.
Dr. Thomas does not object to the Court’s granting his motion to withdraw lawsuit,
dismissing his claims with prejudice, and denying as moot the defendants’ motions for judgment
on the pleadings. He objects only to the Court’s entry of a sanction in the amount of $500
against him and in favor of defendant Indiana Physician Management-Rush, LLC (“IPM”). His

objection is the discovery violations that underpin the $500 sanction are the fault of his lawyer
and not him. Even if that is true—and the Court does not purport to determine the relative fault
between Dr. Thomas and his lawyer—Dr. Thomas, as the litigant, is responsible for the acts of
his attorney. See, e.g., Roland v. Salem Contract Carriers, Inc., 811 F.2d 1175, 1180 (7th Cir.
1987). The Court therefore OVERRULES Dr. Thomas’s objection.
The Court adopts the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, and ORDERS:
1.

The plaintiff’s motion to withdraw lawsuit (Dkt. 54) is GRANTED.

2.

The defendants’ motions for judgment on the pleadings (Dkts. 38 and 45) are

DENIED AS MOOT.
3.

A sanction, and JUDGMENT, in the amount of $500 is HEREBY ENTERED

against plaintiff James Thomas, M.D. and in favor of defendant Indiana Physician ManagementRush, LLC. This resolves the outstanding fees and sanctions issues addressed in Dkts. 53 and
55.
4.

The plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

SO ORDERED.

DATED: ___________________
4/13/2016

DISTRIBUTION:
All ECF-registered counsel of record by email through the Court’s ECF system
VIA UNITED STATES MAIL:
DR. JAMES THOMAS
414 Charles Street
Lebanon, PA 17042
2