Blackwell v. Supervalu Inc. Does

Background

Richard Preston Blackwell, representing himself, sued several defendants over a 2018 incident at Cub Foods. He alleged that a Cub Foods employee stopped him and accused him of shoplifting, and that a police officer later prepared a false report containing defamatory information. Blackwell claimed discrimination and harassment based on race and gender and asserted claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, the Minnesota Constitution, the Minnesota Human Rights Act, the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, other Minnesota laws, and state common-law tort theories.

The Court previously dismissed Blackwell’s federal claims with prejudice for failure to state a claim and declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over his remaining state-law claims. Because no claims remained, it denied his initial application to proceed without paying filing fees as moot. Blackwell then filed a notice of appeal and applied to proceed without paying the appeal fee.

Legal standard

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915, a litigant may seek permission to appeal without paying the filing fee by showing an inability to pay. That permission must be denied if the appeal is not taken in good faith. The Court applied an objective standard and considered whether the appeal was legally or factually frivolous, meaning that its legal arguments had no arguable merit.

Analysis

The Court found that Blackwell had shown he could not afford the fee, but that his appeal was frivolous. Although he described the issue on appeal as the denial of his fee application, the Court explained that the application had been denied as moot because his complaint had already been dismissed. Therefore, the appeal necessarily implicated the earlier dismissal.

The Court reiterated that Blackwell failed to state a claim under § 1983 against the private defendants because they were not state actors and were not acting under color of state law. It also stated that claims against unnamed Saint Paul police officers in their individual capacities would be barred by the statute of limitations once those officers were identified. Claims against Officer Brent Campbell and other unnamed officers in their official capacities failed because Blackwell had not alleged facts showing that they acted under an official Saint Paul policy or unofficial custom. The Court further noted that it had declined supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims after dismissing the federal claims.

Disposition

The Court concluded that Blackwell had offered no legal or factual argument that undermined the earlier dismissal. It found that the appeal was not taken in good faith and ordered that Blackwell’s Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis on Appeal was DENIED.