Hanson v. Rockingham County Department of Corrections, Superintendent

Filing 18

ORDER denying 4 Motion for Reconsideration. ; granting in part and denying in part 10 Motion to Clarify ; granting 15 Motion to Clarify ; taking under advisement 16 Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Complaint to be served on Hazelton. Complaint to be amended as ordered. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Landya B. McCafferty.(mm)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Michael Hanson
v.

Civil No. 11-cv-534-PB

Stephen Church, Superintendent,
Rockingham County House of
Corrections, et al.
O R D E R
Before the court is Michael Hanson’s complaint (doc. no. 1)
and addendum to the complaint (doc. no. 8).1

Also before the

court are plaintiff’s “Motion to Reconsider and Request for
Immediate Relief” (doc. no. 4), “Motion for Clarification” (doc.
no. 10), and a second “Motion for Clarification” (doc. no. 15).
These motions are addressed in this order and a report and
recommendation issued simultaneously herewith.
Plaintiff has also filed a “Renewed Motion for Preliminary
Injunctive Relief” (doc. no. 16).

That motion repeats

plaintiff’s previously filed requests for a preliminary
injunction, which are pending before the court, and also appears
1

Hanson’s initial pleading (doc. no. 1), titled “Petition
for Expedited Writ of Habeas Corpus,” construed and docketed by
the court as a complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, see
Doc. No. 2, as well as Hanson’s filing titled “Verified
Complaint” (doc. no. 8), are considered to be, in the aggregate,
the complaint in this matter for all purposes.

to add an additional claim for relief.

The motion, seeking

amendment to the complaint and injunctive relief, is addressed
herein and in the report and recommendation.
Hanson is a pretrial inmate at the Rockingham County House
of Corrections (“RCHC”), who alleges that his federal
constitutional and state law rights have been violated by RCHC
employees and employees of PrimeCare Medical (“PCM”), the
organization that provides medical services to inmates at the
RCHC.

The matter is before me for preliminary review to

determine whether the complaint states any claim upon which
relief might be granted.

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a); United

States District Court for the District of New Hampshire Local
Rule (“LR”) 4.3(d)(2).
I.

Order to Amend
A.

Complaint

For reasons stated in a report and recommendation issued
this date, the court grants Hanson leave to file an amended
complaint, within thirty days of the date of this order, as
follows:
1.

Hanson must amend his claims seeking relief for

inadequate medical, mental, and dental health care at the RCHC
to name specific individuals to the claim, and to identify what

2

each individual defendant did to violate his rights.

Hanson’s

amended complaint should include a statement of what acts or
omissions on the part of each defendant to these claims denied
him adequate treatment for his medical, mental health and dental
needs, as well as whether and how each of the defendants was
specifically aware of an actual and serious risk to Hanson’s
medical, mental, or dental health and safety.
2.

Hanson must amend his complaint to identify what legal

resources or material he was denied by Lt. Consentino or any
other individual, and what impact that denial had on a specific
hindrance to an actual case he had a right to pursue.

Hanson

must assert what each defendant to this claim did to deprive him
of his right to access the courts.
3.

Hanson must amend his complaint to identify facts to

support that the alleged sexual harassment committed against him
by RCHC C.O. Hazleton was sufficiently objectively serious to
state a constitutional violation, and to show that Hazleton
possessed a sufficiently culpable state of mind to support a
claim for a due process violation.
4.

Hanson must provide, with his amended complaint, a

completed summons form for each defendant named in this action.

3

B.

Request for Preliminary Injunction

Hanson is granted leave to amend his request for
preliminary injunctive relief demonstrating that he can satisfy
the elements required to obtain such an injunction, as set forth
in the report and recommendation issued this date.

Should

Hanson elect to file an amended request, the court will
determine whether a hearing on Hanson’s request is warranted.
II.

Order on Pending Motions
A.

Motion to Reconsider and Request for Immediate Relief
(doc. no. 4)

To the extent Hanson’s motion to reconsider the court’s
construing his initial filing as a civil rights suit filed
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the motion is DENIED.

To the

extent the motion seeks preliminary injunctive relief, that
request has been addressed herein and in the report and
recommendation.

Ruling on this motion is deferred pending

receipt of Hanson’s amended request for a preliminary
injunction.
B.

Motion for Clarification (doc. no. 10)

The motion is construed as a motion to amend the complaint
to incorporate a “Verified Complaint,” (doc. no. 8) into the
complaint in this matter.

The motion is granted in part and

4

denied in part.

The motion is DENIED as moot, as the document

has already been construed as a motion to amend the complaint
and granted.

To the extent the motion seeks to excuse Hanson

from filing certain documents previously ordered by the court
(doc. no. 6), the motion is GRANTED as the court has been
provided with the documents requested.
C.

Motion for Clarification (doc. no. 15)

The motion is GRANTED.

The court’s order continuing the

preliminary injunction hearing (doc. no. 12) has been clarified
in this order and in the report and recommendation issued this
date.
To the extent the motion seeks to amend the complaint to
add a claim, the motion is GRANTED.

The additional claim has

been addressed in the report and recommendation.
D.

Renewed Motion for Preliminary Injunctive Relief (doc.
no. 16)

Hanson’s motion has been addressed in this order and in the
report and recommendation issued this date.

Ruling on this

motion is deferred pending receipt of Hanson’s amended request
for a preliminary injunction.

5

II.

Service Order
Hanson has stated one claim, alleging a Fourth Amendment

violation against Hazleton, upon which relief may be granted.2
Accordingly, the court directs service of the complaint (doc.
nos. 1 and 8), and the motion to amend the complaint (doc. no.
15) on Hazleton.
The clerk’s office is directed to prepare summons forms for
RCHC Officer Hazleton at his place of business:

Rockingham

County House of Corrections, 99 North Rd., Brentwood, NH 03833.
The clerk’s office shall forward to the U.S. Marshal’s office:
the summonses; the complaint (doc. nos. 1 and 8); the motion to
amend the complaint (doc. no. 15); the report and recommendation
issued this date; and this order.

Upon receipt of the necessary

documentation, the U.S. Marshal’s office shall effect service
upon the named defendant.

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(c)(3) and 4(e).

Defendant is instructed to answer or otherwise plead within
twenty-one days of service.

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A).

2

In the report and recommendation, the court recommends
dismissal of the claims in the complaint alleging verbal
harassment; endangerment; retaliation; conspiracy; equal
protection; libel; slander; invasion of privacy; “shock”; and
assault. In the report and recommendation, the court further
recommends that the state law claims in the complaint alleging
medical malpractice and the intentional and negligent infliction
of emotional distress be dismissed without prejudice to refiling
should Hanson amend his complaint to state viable federal claims
arising out of the same case or controversy.
6

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).

Conclusion
Hanson’s complaint is to be served on CO Hazleton.

Hanson

is granted leave to amend his complaint as directed above, and
as discussed in the report and recommendation issued this date.
Should Hanson fail to amend his complaint as directed, the court
will recommend dismissal of any claim that remains
insufficiently alleged to state a claim upon which relief might
be granted.

Hanson is also granted leave to amend his request

for preliminary injunction.

The request will be further

considered upon the filing of such amendment.
SO ORDERED.

_______________________________
Landya B. McCafferty
United States Magistrate Judge
Date:
cc:

January 12, 2012

Michael Hanson, pro se

LBM:jba

7