Court Opinion

ID: 2964337
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-21 21:24:10.30477+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:42:54.141286
License: Public Domain

USCA1 Opinion

	

        September 12, 1996      [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
                                 ____________________

        No. 96-1583

                                RICHARD A. COLE, M.D.,
                                Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                          v.

                               THOMAS WITTMAN, ET AL.,
                                Defendants, Appellees.
                                 ____________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

                     [Hon. William G. Young, U.S. District Judge]
                                             ___________________
                                 ____________________

                                        Before

                                Torruella, Chief Judge,
                                           ___________
                            Cyr and Stahl, Circuit Judges.
                                           ______________
                                 ____________________

            Richard A. Cole, M.D. F.A.C.P. on brief pro se.
            ______________________________
            Jennifer L. Johnston and  Quinn, Buseck, Leemhuis, Toohey & Kroto,
            ____________________      ________________________________________
        Inc.  on brief for appellees Thomas Wittmann, M.D., Vinod Patel, M.D.,
        ____
        Edward Overfield, M.D.,  Chest Diseases of  Northwestern Pennsylvania,
        Saint Vincent Health  Center and Saint  Vincent Foundation for  Health
        and Human Services.
            Daniel J.  Pastore and  The McDonald  Group, L.L.P.  on brief  for
            __________________      ___________________________
        appellees  John  T. Schaaf,  M.D.,  Hamot  Medical  Center  and  Hamot
        Healthcare Corp.
            Jeffrey R.  Cohen, Wayne, Lazares  & Chappell, W. Patrick Delaney,
            _________________  __________________________  __________________
        Dale Huntley  and MacDonald, Illig, Jones  & Britton LLP  on brief for
        ____________      ______________________________________
        appellees MacDonald, Illig, Jones & Britton LLP.
            Jeffrey R.  Cohen  and Wayne,  Lazares  &  Chappell on  brief  for
            _________________      ____________________________
        appellee Millcreek Community Hospital.

                                 ____________________

                                 ____________________

                 Per Curiam.  For the purposes of this appeal, we assume,
                 __________

            without deciding,  that we have jurisdiction  to consider the

            merits of the order dismissing appellant's complaint.  In any

            case, upon careful review of the record and appellate briefs,

            it clearly appears that  no substantial question is presented

            here and that no reversal is warranted.

                 Because appellant made no  showing that a transfer would

            be  in the interest of justice, we conclude that the district

            court did not abuse  its discretion in failing to  order one.

            See Cote v. Wadel,  796 F.2d 981, 984 (7th  Cir. 1986); Dubin
            ___ ____    _____                                       _____

            v. United  States, 380 F.2d 813,  816 (5th Cir. 1967)  (it is
               ______________

            not in the interest of justice  to use 28 U.S.C.   1406(a) to

            "aid a  non-diligent plaintiff who knowingly files  a case in

            the  wrong  district"); see  also  Mulcahy  v. Guertler,  416
                                    _________  _______     ________

            F.Supp. 1083, 1086 (D. Mass. 1976).

                 Appellant's  remaining arguments also are without merit.

            He never sought leave to  amend his complaint, and  amendment

            would  not cure  the defects  which supported  the dismissal.

            Further,  there  is  no  legal  or factual  support  for  his

            assertion of judicial bias.

                 Affirmed.  See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.
                 ________   ___

                                         -2-