Kasso v. City of Minneapolis
- Katherine Menendez
- 0:23-cv-02782
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 13
Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate.
In Kasso v. City of Minneapolis, Magistrate Judge Micko granted in part the City's motion for sanctions, ordering plaintiff Leila Kasso to pay $4,944.21 but declining to dismiss her case.
Pro se plaintiffs in federal cases who fail to comply with court discovery orders or miss their own depositions may face monetary sanctions and warnings of dismissal. This opinion illustrates that a self-represented party's status does not excuse noncompliance with court orders, and that repeated failures — even if not total — can result in significant financial penalties.
What happened
In Kasso v. City of Minneapolis (No. 23-cv-2782), plaintiff Leila Kasso sued the City of Minneapolis and its Police Department. During discovery — the pretrial process in which parties exchange information and documents — Kasso failed to comply with a court order requiring her to produce documents and answer written questions by November 26, 2025, and she also failed to show up for her own deposition scheduled for January 7, 2026. The City moved for sanctions, asking the court to dismiss Kasso's lawsuit entirely and to order her to pay the City's costs.
The court found that Kasso's failures were not substantially justified. She had been present at the November 4, 2025 hearing, asked clarifying questions, and received answers about exactly what she was required to produce. Despite that, she continued to rely on objections the court had already rejected and produced little to nothing in response to the court's order. On the deposition, the court found the City had properly notified Kasso by both email and postal mail, and that her claimed excuses for not receiving notice were unconvincing.
Magistrate Judge Micko granted the City's motion for sanctions in part and denied it in part. The court declined to dismiss the lawsuit with prejudice at this time, finding that case-ending sanctions are an extreme remedy and that Kasso's failures, while serious, had not been total. Instead, the court ordered Kasso to pay the City $4,596.21 in attorney and paralegal fees and $348.00 in deposition costs, for a combined total of $4,944.21, due by May 1, 2026. The court also ordered Kasso to provide complete discovery responses by February 26, 2026, and warned that further noncompliance could result in dismissal of her case with prejudice.
The detailed version
- Kasso v. City of Minneapolis · No. 0:23-cv-02782
- Katherine Menendez
- Feb. 19, 2026
Background
Plaintiff Leila Kasso, who appears to be proceeding without a lawyer (the court references her pro se status), sued the City of Minneapolis and its Police Department. The nature of the underlying claims is not detailed in this opinion, which addresses only the sanctions motion.
The court entered an Amended Pretrial Scheduling Order on August 28, 2025, setting a fact discovery deadline of January 16,
- After Kasso provided little in response to its discovery requests, the City moved to compel discovery on October 21,
- On November 4, 2025, the court held a hearing and ruled from the bench, granting nearly all of the City's requests and setting a substantial completion deadline of November 26,
- Kasso was present, asked clarifying questions, and received answers.
On November 25, 2025 — one day before the deadline — Kasso sent some responses to some interrogatories (written questions parties must answer under oath), but those responses largely restated prior objections the court had already overruled, added little new information, and promised future supplementation. As of the February 9, 2026 sanctions hearing, Kasso had produced almost nothing in response to the City's Requests for Production (demands for documents).
The City also noticed Kasso's deposition (an in-person questioning under oath) for January 7, 2026, sending notice via email and U.S. mail to the addresses Kasso herself had listed in the case docket. Postal records confirmed delivery on November 22, 2025. Kasso did not appear. The City's counsel, a court reporter, and a videographer were present at the scheduled location.
On January 26, 2026, the City moved for sanctions under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37. The court held a hearing on February 9, 2026.
Legal Standards
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37 authorizes courts to impose sanctions when a party fails to comply with discovery orders or fails to attend its own deposition. Available sanctions range from monetary awards to, at the most severe end, dismissal of the case, default judgment against the offending party, or striking pleadings.
For case-ending ("case-terminal") sanctions such as dismissal, courts require a finding of willfulness or bad faith by the offending party. The Eighth Circuit (the federal appeals court covering Minnesota) has held that to justify dismissal, three elements must be present: (1) a court order compelling discovery, (2) a willful violation of that order, and (3) prejudice to the other party. Courts are to consider lesser sanctions before resorting to dismissal, though they are not obligated to select the least severe option — only the most appropriate one.
For failure to attend a deposition or answer interrogatories, Rule 37(d)(3) provides that the court must require the failing party to pay the opposing party's reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, unless the failure was substantially justified or an award would be unjust.
Ruling on Dismissal
The court denied the City's request to dismiss Kasso's lawsuit with prejudice at this time. While acknowledging that Kasso's conduct bore marks of willfulness and bad faith, the court found that her failures had not been total — she had responded to the City's motions and made some efforts to engage in litigation. The court determined that fairness required it to first impose lesser sanctions, and that monetary sanctions best served Rule 37's purposes of punishment and deterrence while preserving the preference for resolving cases on their merits.
The court issued a clear warning: future disregard of court orders or failure to appear at a noticed deposition will merit dismissal of Kasso's suit.
Ruling on Monetary Sanctions
The court granted monetary sanctions in the following amounts:
- Attorney fees for preparing the sanctions motion: $4,070 (granted in full) - Attorney fees for the February 9 hearing: $277.50 (half of the $555 requested; the court noted only one City attorney presented argument) - Paralegal fees: $248.71 (granted in full) - Deposition costs (court reporter and videographer for the January 7 deposition): $348.00 (granted in full) - IME (Independent Medical Examination) costs: Denied, because the IME went forward without issue and those costs were not wasted
The combined total ordered: $4,944.21, due by May 1, 2026.
The court rejected Kasso's arguments that the deposition was not properly noticed, finding that the City had sent notice to Kasso's own listed email and mailing addresses and that postal records confirmed delivery. The court also found unconvincing Kasso's claims that she does not always access her mailbox or that she had email receipt problems, noting that Kasso had replied to an email chain that mentioned the upcoming deposition date.
The court further noted that Kasso's pro se status does not excuse noncompliance with court orders, and that the court had specifically invited questions at the November 4 hearing precisely because Kasso was self-represented.
Additional Orders
The court ordered Kasso to provide complete discovery responses as required by the November 4, 2025 order no later than February 26, 2026, and to submit a declaration (a sworn written statement) certifying her compliance. The parties were also directed to meet and confer (consult with each other) regarding a revised pretrial schedule and submit a proposed schedule by March 3, 2026.
Read the full 13-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.