Andersen v. Carver County Sheriffs Office

Background

Travis Clay Andersen brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law based on events during his detention at the Carver County Jail from March through September 2022. He alleged, among other things, physical assaults, excessive disciplinary segregation, due-process violations, inadequate medical care, verbal sexual harassment, false reports, defamation, interference with access to legal materials, and unconstitutional jail conditions. His amended complaint sought declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and $1,500,000 in compensatory damages from several defendants.

Because the amended complaint did not state whether the individual defendants were sued in their individual or official capacities, the court treated the claims as official-capacity claims. Two defendants, Tosha Bell and Kimberly Grob, answered the amended complaint. The remaining Carver County Defendants moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which tests whether the complaint states a legally sufficient claim assuming its factual allegations are true.

Analysis of the dismissal motion

The court rejected Andersen’s argument that the motion was premature because discovery had not occurred. It concluded that the motion was timely under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The court also found that Andersen’s general assertion that the defendants’ memorandum was misleading gave no specific basis to deny the motion. The court reviewed Andersen’s exhibits but determined that considering them would not change its conclusions.

The court recommended dismissing all claims for declaratory and injunctive relief. It reasoned that the declaratory claims concerned past conduct for which Andersen also sought damages and that his transfer from the Carver County Jail made requests concerning the jail’s conditions moot. The court also noted that the request to preserve electronic evidence was more appropriately addressed, if necessary, through discovery procedures and possible sanctions for failure to preserve evidence.

The court held that the Prison Litigation Reform Act applied because Andersen was a detainee when he filed suit. Under that law, a detained person generally cannot pursue a federal civil claim for mental or emotional injury without showing a physical injury greater than a minor injury or the commission of a statutorily defined sexual act. The court found that most of Andersen’s claims alleged only emotional injuries or minor physical injuries, and that verbal sexual harassment did not meet the statutory definition of a sexual act. It therefore recommended dismissing with prejudice the compensatory-damages claims against Colleen Freiberg, Laura Lynn Zimmerman, Zach Beebe, Ben Beyer, Alex Stern, Shane Dobbs, Reed Ashpole, Jason Kamerud, and Adam Minette, except for the specific claims identified below.

The court found that Andersen plausibly alleged a claim against Adam Minette based on allegations that Minette intentionally slammed a door on Andersen’s foot, causing a broken toe. The court concluded that a broken toe was more than a minor physical injury and that the allegations supported an inference that the force was unreasonable and punitive. It recommended allowing Andersen’s Fourteenth Amendment and Minnesota assault and battery claims concerning that incident to proceed.

The court also found that Andersen plausibly alleged a Fourteenth Amendment claim against Ben Beyer based on allegations that Beyer pressured jail medical staff regarding treatment of Andersen’s broken toe, affecting whether the bone would heal properly. The court recommended allowing that claim to proceed. The court did not make findings or recommendations about the claims against Bell or Grob because they were not parties to the dismissal motion.

The court separately recommended dismissing the claims against the Carver County Sheriffs Office. Because the claims were treated as official-capacity claims, Andersen needed to plausibly allege that a county policy or custom was the moving force behind the alleged constitutional violations. The court found that he did not allege such a policy or custom, or a failure to train, and therefore had not adequately pleaded a municipal-liability claim.

Motions and recommended disposition

The court ordered that Andersen’s motion requesting appointment of counsel and an oral deposition hearing be denied. It stated that a deposition generally did not require the judge’s permission and that the court would not facilitate depositions or settlement discussions at that stage. The court ordered the Clerk of Court to mail Andersen a copy of the District of Minnesota’s Pro Se Civil Guidebook. The court also recommended denying Andersen’s opposition to the dismissal motion.

The court recommended that the Carver County Defendants’ motion to dismiss be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. It recommended that all defendants and claims in the amended complaint be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE except: (1) the claim against Adam Minette concerning unreasonable excessive force resulting in Andersen’s broken toe; (2) the claim against Ben Beyer concerning pressure on medical staff about treatment of the broken toe; and (3) all claims against Tosha Bell and Kimberly Grob, which were not subject to the motion.

The opinion states that this Report and Recommendation was not an order or judgment of the District Court and was not directly appealable to the Eighth Circuit. It explains that a party could file specific written objections within 14 days after being served with the recommendation.