Wren v. Minnesota Department of Corrections

Background

James D. Wren, who represented himself, filed a seven-count civil-rights complaint against the Minnesota Department of Corrections; Paul Schnell; Minnesota Correctional Facility Stillwater; William Bolin; Gary; Jenny Carufel; and Terra O’Conner. The complaint alleged that Department of Corrections staff used rapid drug-screening tests on papers in Wren’s cell without precautions against cross-contamination, producing a positive result. Wren alleged that officials then placed him in administrative segregation and confiscated property based on unconfirmed positive tests.

Wren asserted claims involving the right to counsel under the Minnesota Constitution, due process under the Minnesota Constitution, negligence, discrimination, harassment, access to the courts, and civil conspiracy under 42 U.S.C. § 1985. The magistrate judge reviewed the complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), which requires screening and dismissal of claims that are frivolous or fail to state a claim when a party proceeds without paying the filing fee. The magistrate judge recommended dismissing several portions of the complaint and allowing the remaining portions of Counts I, II, III, V, and VI to proceed.

Objections and analysis

Wren objected to the recommendation concerning Jenny Carufel, Count IV, and the part of Count VII involving an alleged government policy or practice. The court rejected those objections. It held that Wren could not amend his complaint through arguments in his objection and that the complaint did not explain what unlawful conduct Carufel committed. The court also held that the complaint did not allege that Wren was treated differently from similarly situated people or groups, as required for his discrimination claim. The court further concluded that Wren’s conspiracy allegations were impermissibly conclusory and that the policy-or-practice aspect of Count VII duplicated other claims.

Disposition

The court overruled Wren’s objections and adopted the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. It dismissed without prejudice Count IV and Count VII; all remaining claims for monetary damages and other retrospective relief against Schnell, Bolin, Gary, Carufel, and O’Conner in their official capacities; all remaining claims against Carufel in any capacity; and all claims against the Minnesota Department of Corrections and Minnesota Correctional Facility Stillwater. The case proceeds only on the portions of Counts I, II, III, V, and VI identified in the order: individual-capacity claims and official-capacity claims against Schnell, Bolin, Gary, and O’Conner to the extent Wren does not seek monetary or other retrospective damages.

The caption names the warden as “William Bollin,” while the court states that it will refer to him as “William Bolin.”