Lewis v. Rardin

Background

David J. Lewis, who represented himself, sued Warden Jared Rardin, Dr. Elaine York, and correctional officer A. Herzog. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss. Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz recommended dismissing the complaint without prejudice.

Lewis objected to that recommendation. He argued, among other things, that the exhaustion requirement under the Federal Tort Claims Act should not apply to claims under the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty. The district court explained that the recommendation rejected the treaty claims because they were inadequately pleaded. The recommendation also found that Lewis’s effort to reframe his claims as violations of treaty rights, due process rights, and the Eighth Amendment was a futile attempt to amend the complaint because it added no new material supporting those claims. The court further stated that adding factual allegations through an objection to a magistrate judge’s recommendation was procedurally improper.

Court’s Review

The district court reviewed the portions of the recommendation to which Lewis made specific objections de novo, meaning it independently considered those portions. It reviewed the remaining portions for clear error. Because Lewis represented himself, the court construed his objections liberally. The court concluded that the objections did not identify an error of law or fact requiring rejection of the recommendation. After reviewing the rest of the recommendation, the court found it neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law.

Ruling

Judge Jerry W. Blackwell accepted the report and recommendation in its entirety. The court ordered that Lewis’s objections be overruled, denied his Motion to Proceed to Trial and Opposition to Notice of Substitution, granted the defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, and dismissed the matter without prejudice. The opinion does not provide the complaint’s complete factual allegations or explain every claim addressed in the recommendation.