Traylor v. Stone
- Laura Provinzino
- 0:24-cv-04619
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 3
In Traylor v. Stone, Judge Provinzino dismissed several claims without prejudice but allowed the medication claim to proceed pending amendment.
Rayco Traylor’s claims against the State of Minnesota, Lieutenant Bero, and Sgt. Stone were dismissed without prejudice, as were several other claims. His claim concerning withheld prescription medication may proceed, but he must name the responsible defendants in an amended complaint.
What happened
In Traylor v. Stone, Rayco Traylor accused prison officials of constitutional violations, including improper strip searches, retaliation, due-process violations, and withholding prescribed medication.
The court dismissed without prejudice the State of Minnesota, Lieutenant Bero, and Sgt. Stone, along with several claims involving segregation, property, mental-health support, missed meals, religious freedom, and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. Traylor’s claim that unidentified defendants withheld his prescription medication from December 11 through December 17, 2024, was allowed to proceed.
Judge Provinzino adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation after finding no clear error. Traylor must file an amended complaint naming the medication-related defendants by May 25, 2025.
The detailed version
- Traylor v. Stone · No. 0:24-cv-04619
- Laura M. Provinzino
- Apr. 8, 2025
Background
Rayco Traylor brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a law that allows claims against government officials for violating constitutional rights. He alleged, among other things, that prison officials subjected him to repeated strip searches, retaliated against him, placed him in segregation without due process, took his property, denied mental-health support, withheld meals, and withheld prescribed medication. He also asserted religious-liberty claims under the First Amendment and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA).
The court considered a Report and Recommendation from Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty. Because Traylor did not object within the permitted time, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error.
Rulings
The court adopted the Report and Recommendation. It dismissed without prejudice the State of Minnesota, Lieutenant Bero, and Sgt. Stone under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, the statute requiring screening of certain prisoner complaints.
The court also dismissed without prejudice these claims under Section 1915A:
- Traylor’s claim that Sgt. Stone retaliated against him by ordering him to segregation without due process; - Traylor’s claim that Sgt. Stone ordered him to segregation without due process; - Traylor’s claim that John and Jane Doe defendants took his property without due process; - Traylor’s claim that John and Jane Doe defendants refused to provide mental-health support in violation of the Eighth Amendment; - Traylor’s claim that he was deprived of two meals in violation of the Eighth Amendment; - Traylor’s claim that the strip searches violated his First Amendment right to religious freedom; and - Traylor’s claims that the strip searches violated RLUIPA.
Claim Allowed to Proceed
The court allowed Traylor’s claim against the John and Jane Doe defendants who allegedly withheld his prescription medication between December 11 and December 17, 2024, to proceed. Because Traylor had not identified those defendants by name, he was required to file an amended complaint naming them by May 25, 2025.
Disposition
Judge Laura M. Provinzino adopted the Report and Recommendation and entered the listed dismissals without prejudice. The medication-related claim remained pending subject to Traylor’s filing of the required amended complaint.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.