BALLARD v. WELLPATH LLC

United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida

BALLARD v. WELLPATH LLC

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION

JAMES LEE BALLARD,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:22-cv-320-RH-MJF

WELLPATH, LLC,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

ORDER DISMISSING THE FEDERAL-LAW CLAIMS AND REMANDING THE STATE-LAW CLAIMS

The plaintiff James Lee Ballard was detained in a facility for which the defendant Wellpath, LLC was the contracted medical provider. Mr. Ballard filed this action in state court asserting claims arising under both federal and state law. The complaint alleges Wellpath provided medical care that was both constitutionally deficient and negligent. Wellpath removed the action to this court based solely on the presence of a claim arising under federal law, not based on diversity of citizenship. Wellpath moved to dismiss. The magistrate judge entered a report and recommendation concluding the federal-law claims should be dismissed on the merits for failure to allege facts

sufficient to hold Wellpath, rather than any individual, liable for any constitutional violation—failure, that is, to allege the violation resulted from a Wellpath policy or custom. See, e.g., Ireland v. Prummell,

53 F.4th 1274, 1289

(11th Cir. 2022). Mr.

Ballard filed objections to the report and recommendation based on other matters but did not assert the complaint adequately alleged a policy or custom. See ECF No. 49. I have reviewed de novo the issues raised by the objections. All are

unfounded. The report and recommendation concludes the state-law claims should be remanded to state court. Mr. Ballard filed the case there originally, and in his

objections he still asserts the case should go forward there. The record does not establish that there is diversity of citizenship, and Wellpath did not remove the case based on diversity. Wellpath has not objected to the report and recommendation.

IT IS ORDERED: 1. The report and recommendation, ECF No. 48, is accepted and adopted as the court’s opinion. 2. The motion to dismiss, ECF No. 4, is granted as to the federal-law claims and remains pending as to the state-law claims.

3. The federal-law claims are dismissed with prejudice. 4. The case is remanded to the Circuit Court, Eighth Judicial Circuit, Alachua County, Florida. The clerk must take all steps necessary to effect the

remand. SO ORDERED on July 17, 2023. s/Robert L. Hinkle United States District Judge

Reference

Status
Unknown