Filed: May 08, 2014
Latest Update: May 08, 2014
Summary: ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE AN ADDRESS AT WHICH DEFENDANT MACOMB COUNTY MAY BE SERVED PAUL J. KOMIVES, Magistrate Judge. A. At this time, the only remaining parties are plaintiff Searcy and defendants Aramark Corporation and Macomb County. On March 29, 2010, Lavelle Searcy (#195469) and four (4) others initiated this lawsuit against three (3) defendants: Aramark Corporation, Mark A. Hackel and the Macomb County Jail (MCJ). Doc. Ent. 1. On October 14, 2010, Correctional Medical Serv
Summary: ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE AN ADDRESS AT WHICH DEFENDANT MACOMB COUNTY MAY BE SERVED PAUL J. KOMIVES, Magistrate Judge. A. At this time, the only remaining parties are plaintiff Searcy and defendants Aramark Corporation and Macomb County. On March 29, 2010, Lavelle Searcy (#195469) and four (4) others initiated this lawsuit against three (3) defendants: Aramark Corporation, Mark A. Hackel and the Macomb County Jail (MCJ). Doc. Ent. 1. On October 14, 2010, Correctional Medical Servi..
More
ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO PROVIDE AN ADDRESS AT WHICH DEFENDANT MACOMB COUNTY MAY BE SERVED
PAUL J. KOMIVES, Magistrate Judge.
A. At this time, the only remaining parties are plaintiff Searcy and defendants Aramark Corporation and Macomb County.
On March 29, 2010, Lavelle Searcy (#195469) and four (4) others initiated this lawsuit against three (3) defendants: Aramark Corporation, Mark A. Hackel and the Macomb County Jail (MCJ). Doc. Ent. 1. On October 14, 2010, Correctional Medical Services, Inc. (CMS) and Medical Director/Supervisor Doe were added as defendants. Doc. Ent. 32.1 On March 15, 2011, Valerie Watkins was substituted for defendant Medical Director/Supervisor Doe. Doc. Ent. 80.
On June 28, 2012, Searcy filed an amended complaint against MCJ, Hackel, Aramark Corporation, CMS and Medical Director/Supervisor Doe. Doc. Ent. 149.2 However, by way of the Court's March 26, 2013 order (Doc. Ent. 208), plaintiffs Kenneth Witherspoon, William Johnson, Shannon Sexton and James Holland were dismissed with prejudice; defendants MCJ, Hackel, CMS and Watkins's motions to dismiss (Doc. Entries 163 & 156) were granted; and Macomb County was added as a defendant. Thus, at this time, the only remaining parties are plaintiff Searcy and defendants Aramark Corporation and Macomb County.3
B. The Court's March 31, 2014 order directs the U.S. Marshal to serve plaintiff's amended complaint on defendant Macomb County.
By her March 31, 2014 order (Doc. Ent. 238), Judge Hood adopted my February 12, 2014 report and recommendation (Doc. Ent. 233), denied defendant Macomb County's motion to dismiss (Doc. Ent. 214) and directed the U.S. Marshal to serve plaintiff's June 28, 2012 amended complaint (Doc. Ent. 149) on Macomb County. However, before the Clerk's Office prepares the paperwork for service, it needs an address at which Macomb County may be served.
C. Order
Accordingly, within fourteen (14) days of the date of this order, plaintiff SHALL provide the Court will an address at which defendant Macomb County may be served.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
The attention of the parties is drawn to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a), which provides a period of fourteen (14) days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order within which to file objections for consideration by the district judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
