BALLARD
v.
WELLPATH LLC
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The federal-law claims are dismissed with prejudice, and the state-law claims are remanded to state court.
Plaintiff sued Wellpath, the contracted medical provider at a detention facility, alleging constitutionally deficient and negligent medical care. Well…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Monell Liability (Policy Or Custom) cases and more on FLexlaw
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