Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

RAYMOND THOMAS LATSON,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 1:03CV148-SPM/AK

JANICE SPANN, et al,

Defendants.

 /

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff brings this cause pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 alleging that the

Defendants were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs. (Doc. 27). 

Specifically, he claims that on May 3, 2003, he injured his left knee and ankle playing

football at North Florida Reception Center and went immediately to the emergency room

where he alleges Defendant Menefee examined him, ordered x-rays, and determined

that he would need to see an orthopedic specialist. Instead, Plaintiff says he was

transferred to Washington CI, where he was unattended for four to five weeks, although

he contends that he submitted several sick call requests to Janice Spann. Finally,

Plaintiff claims he was examined by Defendant Lance Hughes, who told him there was

Case 1:03-cv-00148-SPM-AK Document 94 Filed 11/17/05 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3

No. 1:03cv148-spm/ak

no orthopedic specialist there to examine him, and he would have to submit another

sick call to Janice Spann. Plaintiff claims that he submitted several sick call requests to

Defendant Hughes, Hagan and Rudolph, but no one responded. Plaintiff claims that he

filed grievances and appealed them to the highest level and was finally sent to RMC to

meet with the specialist, but was returned to Washington CI without seeing one.

All of the named defendants Hughes, Rudolf, Hagan and Menefee (doc. 52) have

responded to the complaint, except Janice Spann, and a motion for summary judgment

was filed. (Doc. 43). The undersigned recommended that summary judgment be

denied because the medical records submitted in support of Defendant’s position were

incomplete and otherwise supported Plaintiff’s version of the facts that his serious knee

injury was not treated. This report and recommendation was adopted (doc. 66), and

this cause has proceeded with discovery.

On September 30, 2004, the Court ordered that Defendant Spann be served with

the Third Amended Complaint through the specially appointed process server at

Washington Correctional Institution (doc. 30), but summons was returned un-executed

on her, and a new address was provided for her. (Doc. 38). Summons was again

issued for her at the new address (doc. 35), and service was completed by certified

mail. (Doc. 36). Plaintiff requested entry of default when Defendant Spann did not

respond to his complaint (doc. 70), which the Clerk entered (doc. 77), and mailed to her

at the last known address provided by the institution (doc. 33). (Doc. 78). This notice

was returned as undeliverable. (Doc. 86).

Case 1:03-cv-00148-SPM-AK Document 94 Filed 11/17/05 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3

No. 1:03cv148-spm/ak

Although there are several viable claims asserted against Defendant Spann, this

case can go forward without her, and at this point, there is nothing further the Court can

do to serve this Defendant with process. It is therefore RECOMMENDED that

Defendant Spann be DISMISSED as a defendant in this cause.

IN CHAMBERS at Gainesville, Florida, this17th day of November, 2005.

__

s/ A. KORNBLUM 

ALLAN KORNBLUM

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 15 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party’s objections within 10 days after

being served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of

review of proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case 1:03-cv-00148-SPM-AK Document 94 Filed 11/17/05 Page 3 of 3