Leftwich v. County of Dakota

Background

Cameron Leftwich was arrested on October 27, 2016, and transported to the Dakota County Jail by the City of Eagan Police Department. He died at the jail on October 28, 2016. Leroy Leftwich, identified as trustee of the statutory class of Cameron Leftwich’s next of kin, filed the first action against the County of Dakota, the City of Eagan, and individual defendants. The claims were brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal civil-rights statute, and state law, and alleged failure to provide adequate medical care, failure to train, and wrongful death.

The scheduling order in the first action set October 29, 2018, as the deadline for motions to amend the pleadings and January 2, 2019, as the deadline to complete fact discovery. On January 2, 2019, Leftwich moved to extend the scheduling deadlines and amend the complaint. The magistrate judge later denied that motion. Leftwich objected to the magistrate judge’s April 9 and April 10 orders.

Before the defendants submitted a supplemental memorandum on the first motion, Leftwich filed the second action. He named all defendants from the first action and three additional individuals. The second action asserted the same general types of federal and state-law claims. The defendants in the second action jointly moved to dismiss. Leftwich then moved in the first action to consolidate the two cases or, alternatively, to amend his complaint.

Court’s analysis

The district court reviewed the magistrate judge’s non-dispositive orders under the standard requiring reversal if they were clearly erroneous or contrary to law. The court concluded that the April 9 and April 10 orders met that standard and affirmed them.

The magistrate judge later recommended granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss in the second action and denying Leftwich’s motion to consolidate or amend in the first action. After conducting a de novo review—an independent review of the disputed recommendations—the district court modified the recommended disposition. Rather than dismissing the second action, the court stayed it pending resolution of the first action. The court accepted the recommendation to deny Leftwich’s motion to consolidate or, alternatively, to amend.

Disposition

The court overruled Leftwich’s objections and affirmed the April 9 and April 10 orders in the first action. It denied Leftwich’s motion to consolidate or, alternatively, to amend. It denied the defendants’ joint motion to dismiss in the second action. The court stayed the second action pending resolution of the first action. The opinion is a procedural order and does not decide the underlying medical-care, failure-to-train, or wrongful-death claims on their merits.