Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

James v. Welch, 96-1452 (1996)

Court: Court of Appeals for the First Circuit Number: 96-1452 Visitors: 10
Filed: Sep. 23, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: ROCK WELCH, ET AL.___________, Cyr and Stahl, Circuit Judges.Kevin Robert James on brief pro se.allegedly unconstitutional delay in furnishing treatment.defendants were responsible for the delay.complaint.discovery.when, and what the response (or lack of response) was.
USCA1 Opinion












September 23, 1996 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________


No. 96-1452

KEVIN ROBERT JAMES,

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

ROCK WELCH, ET AL.,

Defendants, Appellees.

____________________


APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE

[Hon. Morton A. Brody, U.S. District Judge] ___________________

____________________

Before

Torruella, Chief Judge, ___________
Cyr and Stahl, Circuit Judges. ______________

____________________

Kevin Robert James on brief pro se. __________________
Christopher C. Taintor and Norman, Hanson & Detroy on brief for _______________________ ________________________
appellees.


____________________


____________________



















Per Curiam. Plaintiff's papers, liberally ____________

construed, could be read as complaining about both the type

of dental treatment supplied (e.g., fillings versus

extraction) and the delay in furnishing it. It is clear from

plaintiff's appellate brief that he is no longer challenging

the decision to save his teeth rather than to extract them,

and plaintiff has instead redirected his focus on an

allegedly unconstitutional delay in furnishing treatment.

His complaint, however, failed to allege that the named _____

defendants were responsible for the delay. In short, __________

plaintiff failed adequately to allege deliberate indifference

on the part of the named defendants. The magistrate-judge's

report alerted plaintiff to the deficiency in general terms

and, effectively, afforded plaintiff an opportunity to

supplement his pleadings. When plaintiff's objections to the

magistrate-judge's report failed to cure the deficiency, the

court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the

complaint. See Purvis v. Ponte, 929 F.2d 822, 826-27 (1st ___ ________________

Cir. 1991) (upholding 1915(d) dismissal of a factually

inadequate complaint where plaintiff failed, despite notice,

to remedy the omissions).

Plaintiff contends he should have been afforded

discovery. We disagree. Plaintiff failed to allege enough

to warrant discovery. Plaintiff claimed to have copies of

his medical request slips and responses to them, yet he



-2-













failed to state, for example, to whom he reported his pain,

when, and what the response (or lack of response) was.

Affirmed. Loc. R. 27.1. ________















































-3-






Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer