Daigle v. Maine Medical

Opinion

USCA1 Opinion

[NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]

                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

_________________________

          No. 93-1528

                                     DAWN DAIGLE,

                                 Plaintiff, Appellee,

                                          v.

                             MAINE MEDICAL CENTER, INC.,

                                Defendant, Appellant.

                              _________________________

                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

                   [Hon. Shane Devine, Senior U.S. District Judge]
                                       __________________________

                              _________________________

                                        Before

                                Selya, Circuit Judge,
                                       _____________

                            Coffin, Senior Circuit Judge,
                                    ____________________

                               and Cyr, Circuit Judge.
                                        _____________

                              _________________________

               Christine  M. Rockefeller, with whom Paul  R. Cox and Burns,
               _________________________            ____________     ______
          Bryant,   Hinchey,  Cox  &  Schulte,  P.A.  were  on  brief,  for
          __________________________________________
          plaintiff.
               Gerald  F. Petruccelli, with whom Mary Mitchell Friedman and
               ______________________            ______________________
          Petruccelli & Martin were on brief, for defendant.
          ____________________

                              _________________________

_________________________

Per  Curiam.    Having  today  decided  the  merits  of
                    Per  Curiam.
                    ___________

          plaintiff's appeal, see Daigle v. Maine Medical Center, Inc., No.
                              ___ ______    __________________________

          93-1470 (1st  Cir. Jan. ___,  1994), it is unnecessary  to decide

          this cross-appeal.  We, therefore, dismiss it.

Appeal dismissed.  No costs.
                    Appeal dismissed.  No costs.
                    ______ _________   __ _____

2