Fox v. Strafford County Department of Corrections, Superintendent

Filing 45

ORDER Directing US Marshal to Make Service. clerk's Office to forward twenty-five blank summons forms to Plaintiff to complete and return within 14 days of receiving said blank summons forms. Upon receipt, clerk's office is to issue the summonses and forward to U.S. Marshal for service with the documents indicated in this order. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Landya B. McCafferty.(jab)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Duane Leroy Fox
v.

Civil No. 11-cv-295-SM

Superintendent, Strafford County
Department of Corrections, et al.

O R D E R
Before the court is Duane Leroy Fox’s addendum to his
complaint (doc. no. 38), providing the court with defendants’
names in this matter.1

The names have been provided in response

to this court’s orders authorizing service of the complaint and
directing Fox to provide the defendants’ names (doc. no. 26),
and granting Fox’s motion to file an addendum (doc. no. 35).
The court now directs service on the named defendants.
Background
Duane Leroy Fox filed a complaint (doc. no. 1) in this
matter alleging that officials at the Strafford County
Department of Corrections (“SCDC”) had failed to protect Fox
1

In Fox’s addendum (doc. no. 38), he makes a statement
indicating that he believes he was denied adequate mental health
care at the SCDC. There is no mental health care claim pending
in this action. If Fox seeks to amend his complaint to add such
a claim, he must do so by properly filing a motion to amend
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a).

from harm, with deliberate indifference to an existing serious
risk to Fox’s health and safety.

The defendants identified in

the complaint as the SCDC Superintendent and SCDC intake nurse
have been dismissed from the action.

See Doc. No. 3 (Order July

30, 2012) (approving report and recommendation (doc. no. 25)).
The court also, on June 18, 2012, authorized service of the
failure to protect claim on SCDC corrections officers
identified, at that time, only as John Does, and directed Fox to
obtain the names of the defendants to be served.
26 (Order June 18, 2012).

See Doc. No.

Fox’s complaint addendum (doc. no.

38) names defendant officers who, he asserts, acted with
deliberate indifference in failing to protect him from a
substantial risk of serious harm to his health or safety.
Accordingly, the court now directs service of the complaint
(doc. no. 1) on the following named defendants, all of whom were
employed at the SCDC at the time Fox was incarcerated at that
facility: Michael Clancy; Adam Rivera; Robert Metcalf; Kalen
Lavalley; Nicole Wilkins; Tina Kothman; Lori Spagnola; John
Angis; Jon Forcier; Leonard Nadeau; Gillean Nelson; Richard
Dubay; Robert Hayden; Robert Ferrell; Andrew Broomfield;
Cassandra Caillot; James Paice; Gary Rogers; David Meehan;

2

Ashley Lalus; Thomas Moore; Jeff Nickless; Scott Chabot; Erica
Pratt; and Brent Chapple.2
Fox has not provided summons forms for the defendants in
this matter.

The clerk’s office is directed to forward twenty-

five blank summons forms to Fox.

Fox must, within fourteen days

of receiving the blank summons forms, complete a summons form
for each of the named defendants, and then return the completed
forms to the clerk’s office.

Upon receipt of the completed

summons forms, the clerk’s office is directed to issue the
summonses and forward to the United States Marshal for the
District of New Hampshire (the “U.S. Marshal’s office”) the
following documents:
- the summonses;
- copies of the complaint (doc. no. 1);
- plaintiff’s motion to amend filed November 17, 2011 (doc.
no. 15);
- the order (doc. no. 19) and report and recommendation
(doc. no. 20) issued January 17, 2012;
- plaintiff’s motion to amend filed February 13, 2012 (doc.
no. 22);
- the report and recommendation (doc. no. 25) and order
(doc. no. 26) issued June 18, 2012;
2

Brent Chapple was not named in the caption of Fox’s
pleading (doc. no. 38), but is mentioned as a defendant in the
narrative thereof. The clerk’s office is directed to add
Chapple to the docket as a defendant in this matter.
3

- plaintiff’s motion to amend filed August 30, 2012 (doc.
no. 33);
- the order issued September 10, 2012 (doc. no. 35);
- plaintiff’s addendum to the complaint filed November 6,
2012 (doc. no. 38); and
- this order.
Upon receipt of the necessary documentation, the U.S. Marshal’s
office shall effect service upon defendants.

See Fed. R. Civ.

P. 4(c)(3) and 4(e).
Defendants are instructed to answer or otherwise plead
within twenty-one days of service.

See Fed. R. Civ. P.

12(a)(1)(A).
Fox is instructed that all future pleadings, written
motions, notices, or similar papers shall be served directly on
the defendants by delivering or mailing the materials to the
defendants or their attorney(s), pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
5(b).
SO ORDERED.
__________________________
Landya McCafferty
United States Magistrate Judge
March 18, 2013
cc:

Duane Leroy Fox, pro se

4