Johnson v. Hennepin County

Background

Henry Johnson alleged that Hennepin County Sheriff’s officers arrested him on October 27, 2021, on a warrant for a probation-violation charge. He said he was later held for 20 hours in a disciplinary holding cell. According to the complaint, the cell contained discarded food and what appeared to be dried saliva on the wall. Johnson alleged that he requested medical care after falling from a bench and hitting his head, but a nurse examined him only briefly through the locked cell door. He also alleged that he was given nothing to eat during the detention.

Johnson claimed that these circumstances occurred in retaliation for statements he made about a prior driving-under-the-influence arrest and related proceedings. On the complaint form, he identified an Eighth Amendment cruel-and-unusual-punishment claim. Construing his self-represented complaint liberally, the court also understood him to assert a civil-rights claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and a First Amendment retaliation claim. He sought compensatory and punitive damages from each defendant and said he intended to sue individual officers in their individual capacities.

C. Nogle

The court dismissed Johnson’s claims against C. Nogle without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Hennepin County and the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office had been served, but the record did not show that Johnson had served C. Nogle or taken the required steps to enable service.

A March 28, 2023 order required Johnson to submit a completed United States Marshals Service form for each defendant and warned that failure to do so could lead to a recommendation that the matter be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. More than seven months later, Johnson had not submitted the required form for C. Nogle.

Failure to Respond

Hennepin County and the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office moved to dismiss. Johnson filed no response, amended complaint, or other filing addressing the motion. The court explained that although self-represented filings receive a liberal reading, self-represented litigants must still follow procedural and substantive rules. The court stated that Johnson’s failure to respond constituted a waiver and that the motion could be granted on that basis.

Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office

The court concluded that the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office was not a legal entity subject to suit separately from Hennepin County. Under the Minnesota law discussed in the opinion, counties have the power to sue and be sued, but county departments or units do not receive that power. The court therefore dismissed the claims against the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office.

Hennepin County

The court explained that a municipality can be liable under § 1983 only when an unconstitutional injury was caused by a municipal policy or custom. This requirement comes from Monell v. New York City Department of Social Services and is often called municipal or Monell liability.

The court found that Johnson alleged no facts suggesting that a Hennepin County policy or custom caused his injuries. His allegations concerned only the treatment he personally received during the October 2021 detention. Although he alleged that holding cells were not sanitized after each use, the court found that he based this allegation only on the condition of the cell in which he was held and did not describe other cells or provide facts from which a policy or custom could reasonably be inferred.

Disposition

The order dismissed the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute as to C. Nogle. It granted the motion to dismiss filed by Hennepin County and the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office and dismissed the action with prejudice as to those two defendants. The court directed that judgment be entered.