Gallant v. Maine State Prison

Opinion

USCA1 Opinion

July 12, 1996         [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]



                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________


No. 96-1163

        No. 96-1164



                                ALFRED A. GALLANT, II,



                                Plaintiff, Appellant,



                                          v.



                             MAINE STATE PRISON, ET AL.,



                                Defendants, Appellees.

                                 ____________________


APPEALS FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



                              FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE



                 [Hon. Francis J. Boyle, Senior U.S. District Judge]*
                                         __________________________



                                                    
                                 ___________________


No. 96-1617


ALFRED A. GALLANT, JR.,



                                Plaintiff, Appellant,



                                          v.



                                  FRANCIS J. BOYLE,



                                 Defendant, Appellee.



                                 ____________________


APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



                          FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE



                 [Hon. Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr., U.S. District Judge]
                                                 ___________________



                                 ____________________



Before



                                Selya, Cyr and Boudin,

                                   Circuit Judges.
                                   ______________



                                 ____________________



            Alfred A. Gallant, II on briefs pro se.
            _____________________

            Andrew  Ketterer, Attorney  General, and Christopher  C. Leighton,
            ________________                         ________________________

        Assistant Attorney General, on brief for appellees Maine State Prison,

        et al.



                                 ____________________


____________________


____________________

        *Of the District of Rhode Island, sitting by designation.



Per Curiam.  In Nos. 96-1163  and 96-1164, the judgments
                 __________



            are  affirmed substantially  for the  reasons recited  by the
                 ________



            district court in its January 16, 1996 decision.  See Loc. R.
                                                              ___



            27.1.  We add only that the amended complaint also falters by



            failing  to  draw  a   sufficient  link  between  the  wrongs



            allegedly suffered by plaintiff and the actions of  the named



            defendants.   The  motions to  proceed in  forma  pauperis on
                                                   ___________________



            appeal and for appointment of counsel are denied.  The motion
                                                      ______



            for recusal of Chief Judge Torruella is denied as moot.  
                                                    ______



                 In No.  96-1617, the judgment  is affirmed substantially
                                                   ________



            for  the reasons recited by the magistrate-judge in his April



            15,  1996  report,  which  the  district  court  subsequently



            adopted.  See Loc. R. 27.1.
                      ___



                 So ordered.
                 __________


-3-