Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Hummel v. Care

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


March 16, 2009

BARBARA I. HUMMEL AND, RACHEL BINKLEY, PLAINTIFFS
v.
PRIME CARE, DEFENDANT

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Conner

ORDER

AND NOW, this 16th day March, 2009, upon consideration of the order of court (Doc. 11) dated February 4, 2009, which instructed plaintiff Rachel Binkley ("Binkley") to either pay the filing fee or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis on or before March 9, 2009, and upon further consideration of the letter (Doc. 14) received from plaintiff Barbara Hummel ("Hummel") on March 14, 2009, requesting to add additional claims to her amended complaint (Doc. 9) in the above-captioned suit, and it appearing that, as of the date hereof, Binkley has neither paid the filing fee nor submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis,*fn1 and it further appearing that Binkley did not sign the amended complaint, that the factual averments contained therein do not describe any actions that defendants performed with respect to her, and that she has become involved in the instant matter only because she is an acquaintance of Hummel and because Hummel attached a grievance that Binkley submitted to defendants as an exhibit to Hummel's amended complaint, and the court concluding that the amended complaint therefore fails to state any claim upon which relief may be granted to Binkley, and the court further concluding that Hummel may not advance additional claims against defendants by transmitting a letter to the court, and that she may only assert such claims by filing a second amended complaint averring facts sufficient to place defendants on notice of her new claims, it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. All claims of Rachel Binkley are DISMISSED without prejudice to her right to pursue them in a separate suit. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b).

2. The letter (Doc. 14) received from Barbara Hummel is CONSTRUED as a motion for leave to file a second amended complaint and is GRANTED as so construed. Barbara Hummel shall be permitted to file a second amended complaint on or before April 10, 2009 that sets forth all facts and states all claims for which she seeks recovery from defendants.*fn2 The averments of any such complaint must appear in numbered paragraphs, and each paragraph must be limit as far as practicable to a single set of circumstances. See FED. R. CIV. P. 10(b). In the absence of a second amended complaint, the court will instructed that the amended complaint (Doc. 9) be served upon defendants in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d).*fn3

3. The Clerk of Court is instructed to DROP Rachel Binkley as a party to this matter. See FED. R. CIV. P. 21.

4. The Clerk of Court is instructed to transmit this order together with a blank copy of the Prisoner Civil Rights Complaint form to Barbara Hummel via first class mail.

CHRISTOPHER C. CONNER United States District Judge


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.