Johnson v. Ramsey County ADC
- Becky Thorson
- 0:22-cv-00494
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 3
In Johnson v. Ramsey County ADC, Judge Thorson denied discovery, denied amendment permission without prejudice, and denied appointed counsel.
Eugene Laron Johnson’s requests for discovery, further amendment, a litigation guide, and appointed counsel were resolved; Ramsey County ADC, Officer 2369, and Sgt. Sean Delrosario were not yet served according to the order.
What happened
Eugene Laron Johnson sued Ramsey County ADC, Officer 2369, and Sgt. Sean Delrosario under a civil-rights law, alleging excessive force and other claims related to an alleged assault by correctional officers. Johnson represented himself and had not yet served the amended complaint.
The court denied Johnson’s request for surveillance-video discovery because it was directed to the Clerk instead of the defendants and was premature. The court denied his request for a litigation guide as moot because the Clerk had already mailed one. It denied permission to amend without prejudice, allowing Johnson to file a proper motion under the local rule, and denied his request for appointed counsel.
Judge Becky R. Thorson issued the May 4, 2022 order. The order addressed these requests only and did not decide whether Johnson’s underlying claims were valid.
The detailed version
- Johnson v. Ramsey County ADC · No. 0:22-cv-00494
- Becky Thorson
- May 4, 2022
Background
Eugene Laron Johnson filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, a federal civil-rights statute, alleging excessive force and other claims related to an alleged assault by correctional officers. He filed an amended complaint, and the court recognized it as the operative pleading. The court had granted Johnson permission to proceed without paying the filing fee and ordered him to submit completed forms so the U.S. Marshals Service could serve each defendant. At the time of this order, the defendants had not yet been served.
Johnson represented himself. He filed a discovery request, a letter asking for permission to amend and for a Civil Litigation Guide Book, and a motion asking the court to appoint counsel.
Discovery request
Johnson asked the Clerk of Court to seize surveillance video from body cameras worn by the defendants. The court explained that discovery requests must be directed to the defendants under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26. It also found the request premature because the defendants had not been served and had not responded to the amended complaint. The court denied the discovery request.
Request to amend and for a guide book
The court explained that any further amendment would require a motion under Local Rule 15.1, a complete proposed amended complaint, and a version showing how the proposed pleading differed from the existing amended complaint. The court stated that Johnson could file and serve a second amended complaint only if the court granted that motion. The portion of Johnson’s request seeking permission to amend was denied without prejudice.
The court noted that the Clerk had already mailed Johnson a Civil Litigation Guide Book. The portion of the request seeking the guide book was denied as moot.
Motion to appoint counsel
Johnson asked the court to appoint a lawyer to help him litigate and amend his complaint. The court stated that people representing themselves in civil cases do not have a constitutional or statutory right to appointed counsel, and that appointment is instead discretionary. The court found that the case did not warrant appointment of counsel and denied the motion.
Disposition and scope
The order denied the discovery request, denied the motion to appoint counsel, denied the request for a Civil Litigation Guide Book as moot, and denied permission to amend without prejudice. It did not resolve the merits of Johnson’s excessive-force or other underlying claims.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.