Free Motion for Summary Judgment - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut


File Size: 33.5 kB
Pages: 3
Date: December 22, 2004
File Format: PDF
State: Connecticut
Category: District Court of Connecticut
Author: unknown
Word Count: 474 Words, 2,962 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/ctd/23106/27-1.pdf

Download Motion for Summary Judgment - District Court of Connecticut ( 33.5 kB)


Preview Motion for Summary Judgment - District Court of Connecticut
Case 3:03-cv-00735-JCH

Document 27

Filed 12/23/2004

Page 1 of 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT PRISONER CIVIL NO. 3:03CV735 (JCH)(HBF)

MICHAEL HARTSOCK v. JOHN ARMSTRONG, ET AL.

: : :

DECEMBER 22, 2004

DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the defendants respectfully move for summary judgment in their favor for the reason that there are no genuine issues as to any material fact and the defendants are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The undisputed material facts show the following: 1. To the extent that this action may be deemed to include a claim for money

damages against the defendants in their official capacity, any such claim is barred by the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution. 2. Defendant Jack Maleh, M.D., was never served with notice of this action prior to

his death. The Court has no personal jurisdiction over Dr. Maleh. 3. This action is barred by the applicable statute of limitations as to defendants Larry

Myers and Patricia Wollenhaupt. 4. 5. The defendants did not violate any constitutional rights of the plaintiff. The defendants are entitled to qualified immunity in that their conduct did not

violate any clearly established constitutional rights. 6. To the extent that this suit is based upon alleged violations of state law (Conn.

Gen. Stat. § 19a-103), such a suit contravenes the Eleventh Amendment. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 19a-

Case 3:03-cv-00735-JCH

Document 27

Filed 12/23/2004

Page 2 of 3

103 does not specifically authorize suit against anyone and there is no basis for the exercise of supplemental jurisdiction over the plaintiff's state law claim. In support of this matter, the defendants have filed herewith: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) Affidavit of Edward Blanchette, M.D., with attached exhibits A through R; Affidavit of Kevin Dieckhaus, M.D., with attached exhibits A through D; Affidavit of Patricia Ottolini, with attached exhibits A through C; Affidavit of Patricia Wollenhaupt, with attached exhibit A; Affidavit of Lynn Milling, with attached exhibit A; Affidavit of Kathleen Garner; Affidavit of Brian Murphy; Local Rule 56(a)1 Statement; and A Memorandum of Law.

DEFENDANTS John Armstrong, et al. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: _____/s/____________________________ Richard T. Couture Assistant Attorney General 110 Sherman Street Hartford, CT 06105 Federal Bar #ct05480 E-Mail: [email protected] Tel.: (860) 808-5450 Fax: (860) 808-5591

2

Case 3:03-cv-00735-JCH

Document 27

Filed 12/23/2004

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent by first class mail, postage prepaid, this 22nd day of December, 2004, to: Michael Hartsock, Inmate No. 128651 Cheshire Correctional Institution 900 Highland Avenue Cheshire, CT 06410

______/s/__________________________ Richard T. Couture Assistant Attorney General

3