Evangelista v. Federal Bureau of Prisons

Background

Wayne Evangelista, also identified in the caption as Wayne Nance Jr., is an inmate at the Federal Prison Camp in Duluth, Minnesota (FPC-Duluth). He filed a class-action complaint against the Federal Bureau of Prisons (FBP) and the Warden of FPC-Duluth on behalf of himself and a proposed class of prisoners at that facility. The complaint, construed by the court as invoking the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause and the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment, as well as the First Step Act (FSA), the Second Chance Act (SCA), and the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), alleged: (1) toxic exposure at FPC-Duluth; (2) mishandling of earned-time credits (ETC) under the FSA; and (3) improper residential reentry center (RRC) placements under the SCA. Evangelista sought declaratory relief, injunctive relief (including toxin-free housing, lifelong medical care, accurate ETC calculations, and proper RRC placement), and $100,000 in compensatory damages per prisoner per year.

Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation

United States Magistrate Judge Shannon G. Elkins issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) on June 3, 2025, recommending dismissal of most of the complaint. The R&R recommended: (1) dismissal with prejudice of class claims because a non-attorney cannot adequately represent a class; (2) dismissal with prejudice of individual-capacity Eighth Amendment claims against the Warden; (3) denial of the request for a preliminary injunction; (4) dismissal without prejudice of FSA earned-time credit and SCA reentry placement claims as duplicative of other litigation; and (5) dismissal without prejudice of FTCA claims and Eighth Amendment claims for money damages against the defendants for lack of jurisdiction.

Standard of Review

Portions of an R&R to which a party objects are reviewed de novo (fresh, independent review). 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Unobjected-to portions are reviewed only for clear error. See Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996). Because Evangelista is self-represented, the court construed his filings liberally. Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th Cir. 2004).

Ruling on Each Issue

1. Class Claims — Dismissed With Prejudice

The court reviewed this recommendation de novo because Evangelista specifically objected, arguing he is an "attorney in fact." The court overruled that objection. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(4), a class representative must adequately protect the interests of the class. A self-represented (pro se) litigant lacks the legal competence to represent others, citing Fymbo v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 213 F.3d 1320, 1321 (10th Cir. 2000), and related circuit authority. The court also noted that an "attorney-in-fact" — a person authorized to act as someone's agent for business transactions — is not the same as a licensed attorney authorized to practice law in federal court. The class claims were dismissed with prejudice.

2. Individual-Capacity Eighth Amendment Claims Against the Warden — Dismissed With Prejudice

Evangelista made only a general, conclusory objection, invoking a Supreme Court case he called "Loper" without providing any legal analysis or explaining how that decision conflicts with the magistrate judge's recommendations. Because the objection lacked specificity, the court reviewed for clear error only. Finding none, the court dismissed the Eighth Amendment claims against the Warden in his individual capacity with prejudice and dismissed the Warden in his individual capacity from the action entirely.

3. Preliminary Injunction — Denied

A preliminary injunction is an emergency court order requiring a party to act or refrain from acting while litigation proceeds. Evangelista again made only a general objection, restating harm and reiterating his request without advancing specific legal arguments. The court reviewed for clear error, found none, and denied the preliminary injunction request.

4. FSA/SCA Claims and Money Damages — Dismissed Without Prejudice (Unobjected-To)

Evangelista did not object to the magistrate judge's recommendations that: (a) FSA earned-time credit and SCA reentry placement claims be dismissed without prejudice as duplicative; and (b) FTCA claims and Eighth Amendment claims for money damages be dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. The court reviewed for clear error, found none, and adopted these recommendations. These dismissals without prejudice leave open the possibility of refiling in an appropriate form or forum, though the court made no findings on that question.

Surviving Claims

The court noted in a footnote that following these dismissals, the only remaining claims are Evangelista's individual requests for injunctive or declaratory relief for alleged Eighth Amendment violations against the FBP and the Warden in his official capacity.

Summary of Dispositions

- Class claims: dismissed with prejudice - Individual-capacity Eighth Amendment claims against the Warden: dismissed with prejudice - Warden in individual capacity: dismissed from the action - FSA/SCA claims: dismissed without prejudice - FTCA claims and Eighth Amendment money damages claims: dismissed without prejudice - Preliminary injunction request: denied