Case Activity (98)

1. Misc | Filed: August 31, 2026 | Entered: August 31, 2026 Murphy v. Leutche et al

   Civil Rights: Other | Massachusetts

   Copy Mailed

   Copy re 58 Order on Motion to Dismiss mailed to James Murphy on 8/31/2026. (JAM)

2. Order | Filed: August 31, 2026 | Entered: August 31, 2026 Murphy v. Leutche et al

   Civil Rights: Other | Massachusetts

   Order on Motion to Dismiss

   Judge Richard G. Stearns: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered finding as moot 48 Motion to Dismiss; granting 55 Motion to Dismiss.
   
   Defendant Mark Brewster asks the court, pursuant to 12(b)(6), 12(b)(1), and 8(a)(2), to dismiss some of plaintiff James Murphy's claims in the Second Amended Complaint (Dkt # 15). Murphy challenges the acts of Brewster as a private ambulance owner/operator and two of its medical transport employees, Vincent Difazio and Elijah Hallifax (ambulance defendants), in connection with their alleged receipt, restraint, transportation, and treatment of Murphy after police initiated an emergency psychiatric application. Brewster asserts that, as a private company, plaintiff's claims against him, his company, and employees, fail as a matter of law.
   
   The court agrees. The civil rights statute, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, upon which Murphy brings his constitutional claims against the ambulance defendants, reaches only conduct attributable to the State. See Rockwell v. Cape Cod Hospital, 26 F.3d 254 (1st Cir. 1994) (holding that the hospital and clinicians were not state actors under any recognized test and thus were not subject to suit under § 1983). Further, the constitutional claims asserted by Murphy against the ambulance defendants do not apply to these facts or, more generally, a civil proceeding for acts by private parties. Accordingly, the court ALLOWS the ambulance defendants' unopposed motion to dismiss. The Clerk will dismiss defendants DiFazio, Hallifax, Brewster, and Brewster Ambulance Company from this case.
   
   (MZ)

3. 96 additional result(s)