Spencer v. Brott
- David Doty
- 0:17-cv-05035
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 5
In Spencer v. Brott, Judge Leung partly granted Spencer’s request for service forms and denied his request to amend without prejudice.
Marvin Spencer had to complete service forms for 12 remaining defendants within 30 days, and those defendants could later face a recommendation of dismissal for failure to prosecute if he did not comply. The order also affected Spencer’s attempt to amend the complaint in Spencer II, which was denied without prejudice.
What happened
In the consolidated cases Spencer v. Brott, pro se plaintiff Marvin Spencer submitted 30 forms for serving defendants and asked the court for 21 more. He also asked to correct the defendants named in one case.
The court granted in part and denied in part Spencer’s request for additional forms. It ordered that 15 forms be provided and required Spencer to submit forms for 12 remaining defendants within 30 days. The court warned that failure to meet the deadline could lead to a recommendation that those defendants be dismissed for failure to prosecute. It denied Spencer’s request to amend without prejudice because he did not provide a proposed amended complaint.
Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung issued the order on May 16, 2019. The order addressed service and amendment procedures and did not decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Spencer v. Brott · No. 0:17-cv-05035
- David Doty
- May 16, 2019
Background
The two cases, identified in the order as Spencer I and Spencer II, had been consolidated. Marvin Spencer, who was representing himself, submitted 30 completed U.S. Marshal Service Forms (Form USM-285) and requested 21 additional forms. Of the 30 forms, 14 concerned currently named defendants, 6 concerned defendants Spencer had previously dismissed voluntarily, and 10 concerned people not named in either case.
Spencer also filed a document titled Motion to Correct the Errors in Spencer v. Brott II. The court interpreted that filing as a motion to amend the complaint in Spencer II. Spencer said that the defendants had been named incorrectly and that the case should instead name federal government defendants, including employees of the U.S. Marshals Service. He also said he planned to name five U.S. Marshals and Correction Corporation of America as defendants. He did not submit a proposed amended complaint.
Rulings
The court identified 12 remaining defendants for whom it had not received completed service forms: C/O Tammy Boros, C/O Nicholas Simon, Sgt. Aric Hanson, Sgt. Rebecca Beal, C/O Christopher Hansen, C/O Theresa Klinge, C/O Jennie R. Thompson, Alyssa Pfeifer, Mindi Johnson, Briony Bohn, Cassandra James, and Kayla Hertenstein.
The court granted in part and denied in part Spencer’s letter request for additional forms. It ordered that Spencer receive 15 forms, including three extra forms in case he made errors. Within 30 days from the order’s date, Spencer had to submit a properly completed form for each of the 12 remaining defendants. If he failed to meet that deadline, the court stated that it would be recommended that those defendants be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The order did not itself dismiss those defendants.
The court denied without prejudice Spencer’s Motion to Correct the Errors in Spencer v. Brott II because he had not provided a proposed amended pleading. “Without prejudice” means the order did not bar Spencer from bringing the request again in an appropriate form. Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung signed the order. The order concerned service and amendment procedures, not the merits of Spencer’s claims.
Read the full 5-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.