From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Going v. Laprel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE
Nov 14, 2014
Civil No. 2:14-cv-00031-NT (D. Me. Nov. 14, 2014)

Opinion

Civil No. 2:14-cv-00031-NT

11-14-2014

DOUGLAS J. GOING Plaintiff, v. ALAYNA J. LAPREL, et al, Defendants.


ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court on September 29, 2014, his Recommended Decision (ECF No. 59). The Plaintiff filed his Objection to the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 60) on October 15, 2014. On October 16, 2014, Defendant Louis Ray Going filed a motion to dismiss (ECF No. 60). Defendants William Broderick, Ellen Gorman, Thomas Humphrey and Mary Gay Kennedy filed their response to the Plaintiff's objection on October 27, 2014 (ECF No. 63). Defendants Alayna Laprel and Neal Smith filed their response to the Plaintiff's objection on October 31, 2014 (ECF No. 64). Defendants Richard Going and Frederick Clay Going filed their response to the Plaintiff's objection on November 3, 2014 (ECF No. 65).

I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision, together with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision; and I concur with the recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in his Recommended Decision, and determine that no further proceeding is necessary. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is hereby AFFIRMED. Motions to Dismiss filed by Alayna Laprel, Neal Smith, William Broderick, Ellen Gorman, Thomas Humphrey, Mary Gay Kennedy, Jens Bergen, Richard Going, and Frederick Clay Going are hereby GRANTED.

It is further ORDERED that Defendant Louis Ray Going's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 61) is GRANTED on the basis that no objection was filed. Additionally, Louis Ray Going's motion to dismiss incorporates the motions to dismiss asserted by Defendants Laprel, Smith, and Bergen. The Court notes that there is nothing in the Amended Complaint to suggest that Louis Ray Going is in a different position than Laprel, Smith, and Bergen. Accordingly, for reasons given in the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommended Decision to grant Laprel, Smith, and Bergen's motions to dismiss, Louis Ray Going's motion to dismiss is also granted.

SO ORDERED.

/s/ Nancy Torresen

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 14th day of November, 2014.


Summaries of

Going v. Laprel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE
Nov 14, 2014
Civil No. 2:14-cv-00031-NT (D. Me. Nov. 14, 2014)
Case details for

Going v. Laprel

Case Details

Full title:DOUGLAS J. GOING Plaintiff, v. ALAYNA J. LAPREL, et al, Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE

Date published: Nov 14, 2014

Citations

Civil No. 2:14-cv-00031-NT (D. Me. Nov. 14, 2014)

Citing Cases

Todd v. Maine

With respect to the former chief of police, the plaintiff alleges no facts indicating that this individual…