Murray v. Wetzel et al

Filing 230

ORDER: 1. MJ Carlsons R and R's Docs. 225 , 226 , 228 are ADOPTED in their entireties;2. All mtns related to a PI regarding the treatment of Murrays Hepatitis C 172 , 175 , 182 , 189 , 199 are DENIED as moot;3. The mtn to dismiss filed by Marsh, Moore, Noel, and Everding 140 is GRANTED, and all claims against those Dfts are DISMISSED;4. The mtn to dismiss filed by Cowan, Miller, and Palmigiano 144 is GRANTED IN PART. Murrays Eighth Amendment claim against Miller and Cowan rela ted to the treatment provided for Murrays Hepatitis C shall proceed. All claims against Palmigiano, and claims against Cowan and Miller related to Murrays fall from his bunk and subsequent medical treatment, as well as claims related to alleged viola tions of Murrays First Amendment rights, are DISMISSED; and5. Murrays mtn for relief 161 is GRANTED IN PART, to the extent that Murrays claims for monetary damages against Dfts in their individual capacities shall not be dismissed at this stage of litigation.Signed by Honorable Sylvia H. Rambo on 3/21/19. (ma)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

No. 3:17-cv-00491

IRVING MURRAY,

(Senior Judge Rambo)

Plaintiff,

(Magistrate Judge Carlson)

v.
JOHN E. WETZEL, et al,
Defendants.
ORDER

MARCH 21, 2019
Irving Murray, formerly a Pennsylvania state prisoner, filed a 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 complaint alleging that numerous defendants violated his First and Eighth
Amendment rights. (Doc. 1). In response to several motions, Magistrate Judge
Martin C. Carlson has issued three Reports and Recommendations. (Doc. 225, 226,
228).
In the first, Magistrate Judge Carlson recommends that this Court deny as
moot all motions related to a preliminary injunction regarding treatment for
Murray’s Hepatitis C, as Murray has been released from custody. (Doc. 225). The
second Report and Recommendation recommends that the Court grant a motion to
dismiss filed by Defendants Robert Marsh, Keri Moore, Paul Noel, and E. Everding
on the ground that the complaint contains no well-pled allegations against those four

defendants.

(Doc. 226).

Finally, the third Report and Recommendation

recommends that this Court grant in part and deny in part the motion to dismiss filed
by Defendants Jay Cowan, R. Miller, and Nancy Palmigiano on the grounds that
Murray failed to exhaust his administrative remedies for several claims and, of the
remaining claims, sufficiently stated a claim only with regard to his Hepatitis C
treatment. Magistrate Judge Carlson further recommends that this Court grant in
part Murray’s motion for relief. (Doc. 228). No timely objections were filed.
Where no objection is made to a report and recommendation, this Court will
review the recommendation only for clear error. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), advisory
committee notes; see Henderson v. Carlson, 812 F.2d 874, 878 (3d Cir. 1987)
(explaining that court should in some manner review recommendations regardless
of whether objections were filed). Regardless of whether timely objections are
made, district courts may accept, reject, or modify—in whole or in part—the
magistrate judge’s findings or recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Local Rule
72.31. The Court has reviewed the record and finds no clear error. Consequently,
it is hereby ordered that:
1.

Magistrate Judge Martin C. Carlson’s Reports and Recommendations
(Docs. 225, 226, 228) are ADOPTED in their entireties;

2

2.

All motions related to a preliminary injunction regarding the treatment
of Murray’s Hepatitis C (Docs. 172, 175, 182, 189, 199) are DENIED
as moot;

3.

The motion to dismiss filed by Marsh, Moore, Noel, and Everding
(Doc. 140) is GRANTED, and all claims against those Defendants are
DISMISSED;

4.

The motion to dismiss filed by Cowan, Miller, and Palmigiano (Doc.
144) is GRANTED IN PART. Murray’s Eighth Amendment claim
against Miller and Cowan related to the treatment provided for
Murray’s Hepatitis C shall proceed. All claims against Palmigiano, and
claims against Cowan and Miller related to Murray’s fall from his bunk
and subsequent medical treatment, as well as claims related to alleged
violations of Murray’s First Amendment rights, are DISMISSED; and

5.

Murray’s motion for relief (Doc. 161) is GRANTED IN PART, to the
extent that Murray’s claims for monetary damages against Defendants
in their individual capacities shall not be dismissed at this stage of
litigation.

BY THE COURT:
s/Sylvia H. Rambo
Sylvia H. Rambo
Senior United States District Judge
3