FLOOD v. BALL et al

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
ANDREW FLOOD,
Plaintiff,
v.
CHARLES BALL,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
1:24-cv-00239-SDN
ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION
On April 17, 2026, the Magistrate Judge recommended granting in part and
denying in part Plaintiff’s motion for leave to file a third amended complaint. ECF No. 62.
The Magistrate Judge notified the parties that failure to object would waive their right to
de novo review and appeal. The time within which to file objections expired on May 1,
2026, and no objections have been filed, either before or after the deadline.
The Court finds no clear error and agrees with the findings set forth in the
Recommended Decision. The Court therefore AFFIRMS and ADOPTS the Magistrate
Judge’s Recommended Decision. ECF No. 62. The Court GRANTS IN PART and
DENIES IN PART Plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint. ECF No. 49. The Court
grants Plaintiff leave to amend the complaint as to the claims of excessive force (Count I)
and false arrest (Count II) arising from the 2019 incident. The Court DISMISSES all
other claims (Counts III, IV, and V). The Court DENIES Defendant’s motion to strike the
entire amended complaint. ECF No. 47.
Case 1:24-cv-00239-SDN Document 67 Filed 06/04/26 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

2
S O ORDERED.
Dated this 4th day of June, 2026.
/s/ Stacey D. Neumann
U NITED S TATES D ISTRICT J UDGE
Case 1:24-cv-00239-SDN Document 67 Filed 06/04/26 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>