Barron v. Pallito et al

Filing 91

ORDER: 90 Second Motion for Final Judgment DENIED. Dfts Pallito, Stone, Porter, Barriere and Jenkins to answer 61 Second Amended Complaint not later than 12/9/2011. Claims against dfts Ballard and MHMI DISMISSED with prejudice. Signed by District Judge J. Garvan Murtha on 11/18/2011. (kak)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF VERMONT DAVID WAYNE BARRON, Plaintiff, : : : v. : : ANDREW PALLITO, PRISON HEALTH : SERVICES, INC., DR. DELORES : BURROUGHS-BIRON, DR. BALLARD, : DR. GARRY WEISCHEDEL, RANDY : PORTER, THERESA STONE, KEVIN : JENKINS, JODI BARRIERE and : MENTAL HEALTH MANAGEMENT, : INC., : Defendants. : Docket No. 1:09-cv-209-jgm ORDER Pursuant to the Amended Order (Doc. 87) adopting the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, the motion to dismiss filed by Defendants Dr. Ballard and Mental Health Management, Inc. (“MHMI”) was granted and Plaintiff was granted leave to replead his claims against them within 30 days. Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint as to these Defendants; therefore, the claims are hereby DISMISSED with prejudice. Construing the Second Motion for Final Judgment filed by Defendants Ballard and MHMI (Doc. 90) as one filed under Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the motion is DENIED. A final judgment will be entered when all claims and all parties’ rights and liabilities have been adjudicated. Defendants Andrew Pallito, in his official capacity, Theresa Stone, Randy Porter, Jodi Barriere and Kevin Jenkins were directed to answer the Second Amended Complaint within 20 days. It is hereby ORDERED that an answer shall be filed not later than December 9, 2011. If they fail to do so, default will be entered against them, upon motion from the Plaintiff. SO ORDERED. Dated at Brattleboro, in the District of Vermont, this 18th day of November, 2011. /s/ J. Garvan Murtha Honorable J. Garvan Murtha United States District Judge

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?