Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 14, 2024

Sivels v. Ramsey County

Judge
Donovan Frank
Docket
0:23-cv-00894
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
14
Civil RightsSection 1983Motion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Danielle Sivels v. Ramsey County, Judge Frank granted in part and denied in part the County’s motion to dismiss claims arising from detainee transport.

Who this affects

Danielle Sivels’s claims against Ramsey County were narrowed. The Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office was terminated as a party; the official-policy, respondeat-superior, and negligent-supervision claims were dismissed with prejudice; and the unofficial-custom and failure-to-train-or-supervise claims remained pending.

What happened

Danielle Sivels alleges that Marquet Johnson, an employee of Inmate Services Corporation, sexually assaulted her while transporting her to Minnesota in 2019. She claims Ramsey County knew about abuse involving transport contractors but failed to take adequate protective steps.

Sivels brought claims against Ramsey County based on its policies and practices, failure to train or supervise contractors, responsibility for Johnson’s conduct, and negligent supervision. Ramsey County asked the court to dismiss those claims and the claim against the Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office.

In Danielle Sivels v. Ramsey County, Judge Donovan W. Frank granted in part and denied in part the motion. The court dismissed the Sheriff’s Office from the case, dismissed the official-policy claim, respondeat-superior claim, and negligent-supervision claim with prejudice, but allowed the claims based on an unofficial custom and failure to train or supervise to continue.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Sivels v. Ramsey County · No. 0:23-cv-00894
Judge
Donovan Frank
Date
Aug. 14, 2024

Background

Ramsey County had contracted with Inmate Services Corporation for more than a decade to transport detainees. The amended complaint alleged that ISC and its chief executive officer had been the subject of many civil-rights lawsuits involving excessive force, denial of medical care, and sexual assault or abuse. It also alleged that Ramsey County knew about a 2016 sexual assault involving a different transport contractor and knew about misconduct allegations involving ISC.

Sivels alleged that ISC employee Marquet Johnson sexually assaulted and raped her during a 2019 transport from Texas to Minnesota. She further alleged that Johnson later sent sexual messages to her prison-issued tablet. Johnson was later arrested on federal civil-rights charges and pleaded guilty to one count of willful deprivation of civil rights.

Sivels asserted three relevant claims against Ramsey County: municipal liability under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, responsibility under Minnesota’s respondeat-superior law, and negligent supervision. She also brought a municipal-liability claim against the Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office. Ramsey County moved to dismiss these claims under Rule 12(b)(6), which tests whether a complaint states a legally sufficient claim based on its alleged facts.

Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office

Sivels agreed with Ramsey County that the Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office could not be sued. The court dismissed the claim against the Sheriff’s Office and terminated it as a party. The order did not state that this dismissal was with or without prejudice.

Municipal-liability claims

The court dismissed Sivels’s theory that Ramsey County’s decision to contract with ISC was an official municipal policy. The court said the allegations did not plausibly show that Sheriff Bob Fletcher created a new official policy or had final authority over the selection of a prison-transport contractor. The order dismissed this part of the Monell claim with prejudice.

The court allowed Sivels’s theory based on an unofficial custom to proceed. It found that allegations involving the 2016 assault by another transport contractor and Sivels’s 2019 assault, together with allegations about Ramsey County’s knowledge and failure to act, plausibly supported an unconstitutional custom at the motion-to-dismiss stage. The court noted that the allegations might not be enough at summary judgment, but were sufficient at this stage.

The court also allowed the failure-to-train-or-supervise theory to proceed. It found that Sivels alleged more than a general risk of misconduct: she alleged that Ramsey County knew of an earlier assault, failed to take sufficient remedial action, did not adequately monitor contractors, hired contractors without sufficient regard to their backgrounds, and failed to ensure compliance with laws intended to protect detainees from abuse.

Respondeat-superior claim

The court granted the motion to dismiss Sivels’s respondeat-superior claim. Minnesota law makes municipalities liable for torts committed by their officers, employees, and agents acting within the scope of their duties, but does not include independent contractors in those terms. The contract described ISC as an independent contractor, and the amended complaint did not allege enough facts showing that Ramsey County controlled ISC in a way that established an employee or agent relationship. The order dismissed this claim with prejudice.

Negligent-supervision claim

The court granted the motion to dismiss Sivels’s negligent-supervision claim. It concluded that Ramsey County’s hiring, retention, and supervision decisions were discretionary acts protected by Minnesota statutory immunity. The order dismissed this claim with prejudice.

Disposition

The court granted in part and denied in part Ramsey County’s motion to dismiss. It dismissed the Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office as a party; dismissed with prejudice Sivels’s Monell claim based on an official policy, her respondeat-superior claim, and her negligent-supervision claim; and denied dismissal of her Monell claims based on an unofficial custom and failure to train or supervise. Donovan W. Frank signed the order on August 14, 2024.

The authoritative version

Read the full 14-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.