Adams v. Minn. Dep't of Corr.

Decision Date29 January 2015
Docket NumberCase No. 14-cv-977 (MJD/TNL)
PartiesDiawain Adams, Plaintiff, v. Minnesota Department of Corrections, Thomas Roy, Commissioner of the Department of Corrections, Yvonne Lerro-Miller, Sara Hard, Director of Health Services, Ellie Fuller, Lori Groby, N. Connolly, and Jean Nichole Jakubik, Defendants.
CourtUnited States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States District Court of Minnesota

REPORT & RECOMMENDATION

Gary M. Hazelton, Hazelton Law Firm PLLC, 677 Anne Street Northwest, Suite B, Bemidji, MN 56601, and Mark N. Stageberg, 5101 Thimsen Avenue, Suite 201, Minnetonka, MN 55345 (for Plaintiff); and

Eric V. Brown, Minnesota Attorney General's Office, 445 Minnesota Street, Suite 1100, St. Paul, MN 55101-2128 (for Defendants Minnesota Department of Corrections, Thomas Roy, Sara Hard, Ellie Fuller, and Lori Groby and Defendants Yvonne Lerro-Miller, N. Connolly, and Jean Nichole Jakubik in their official capacities only).

I. INTRODUCTION

This matter is before the Court, United States Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung, on State Defendants' Motion for Partial Dismissal of Plaintiff's Complaint (ECF No. 14). This motion has been referred to the undersigned magistrate judge for a report and recommendation to the district court, the Honorable Michael J. Davis, Chief District Judge of the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72.1(b).

A hearing was held. Mark N. Stageberg appeared on behalf of Plaintiff Diawain Adams. Eric V. Brown appeared on behalf of Defendants Minnesota Department of Corrections ("MNDOC"); Thomas Roy, Commissioner of the Department of Corrections; Sara Hard, Director of Health Services; Ellie Fuller; and Lori Groby as well as Defendants Yvonne Lerro-Miller, N. Connolly, and Jean Nichole Jakubik in their official capacities only (collectively, "Defendants").1

Based upon the record, memoranda, and the proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that State Defendants' Motion for Partial Dismissal of Plaintiff's Complaint (ECF No. 14) be GRANTED.

II. BACKGROUND2

This lawsuit arises out of events occurring in 2010 when Adams was incarcerated at the Stillwater, Minnesota correctional facility ("MCF-Stillwater"). (Compl. ¶¶ 1, 9, 12, ECF No. 1.) In the spring of 2010, Adams sought medical attention from MCF-Stillwater's Health Services unit. (Id. ¶ 10.) Adams was evaluated by Defendant Yvonne Lerro-Miller, a certified medical assistant. (Id. ¶ 11.) At or about the same time, Lerro-Miller "made unwanted sexual advances to [Adams] and [began] supply[ing] illegal and hal[lucinogenic] drugs to [Adams]." (Id. ¶ 11.)

Up until the fall of 2010, Lerro-Miller "promoted an aggressive, sexual relationship with [Adams], including touching, oral sex, and intercourse." (Id. ¶ 12.) "[O]n many occasions when [Lerro-Miller] initiated the sexual advances, [Adams] was high and under the influence of . . . and affected by the improper drugs provided to him." (Id. ¶14.) Adams subsequently became addicted to these drugs. (Id. ¶ 24.) Lerro-Miller also told Adams that she wanted to have his child and ultimately became pregnant. (Id. ¶¶ 15, 17; see id. ¶ 21.) During this time, Lerro-Miller coerced Adams "to continue providing . . . sexual favors to [her]" by threatening to claim that Adams had sexually assaulted her. (Id. ¶ 13). Lerro-Miller's conduct was reported that fall and she eventually pleaded guilty to third-degree criminal sexual conduct. (See id. ¶¶ 25, 26.)

Adams alleges that certain employees in MCF-Stillwater's Health Services unit—Defendants Ellie Fuller, Lori Groby, N. Connolly, and Jean Nichole Jakubik—knew ofLerro-Miller's improper conduct and failed to report it to their supervisors—Defendants Sara Hard, Director of MCF-Stillwater's Health Services, and Thomas Roy, Commissioner of the Department of Corrections. (Id. ¶¶ 4, 19, 20, 21, 22.) Adams further alleges "[t]hat for months while the aforementioned improper and illegal activity was occurring[, . . . Director Hard and Commissioner Roy] failed to investigate, intervene, and require reporting of [Lerro-Miller's] improper and illegal activity . . . ." (Id. ¶ 23.) Once Lerro-Miller's conduct was brought to light, Adams alleges that "Commissioner [Roy] and the [c]orrections [o]fficers at [MCF-Stillwater] . . . verbally and physically abused [him], blamed [him] for the sexual encounters, . . . and denied him wanted and needed legal medications for [his] on-going head[ache] problem." (Id. ¶ 25.)

Adams brings claims against Defendants in their individual and official capacities3 for (1) violations of his civil rights under the Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, and FourteenthAmendments pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 19854 (Counts I, II, VI); negligence (Counts III, IV, VII); and respondeat superior (Count V).

III. MOTION FOR PARTIAL DISMISSAL

Defendants move for partial dismissal of Adams's Complaint. Defendants assert that all claims against the MNDOC and its employees in their official capacities are barred by the Eleventh Amendment.5 (Defs.' Mem. in Supp. at 4-6.) Additionally, Defendants assert that Adams's claims against Commissioner Roy and Director Hard in their individual capacities lack sufficient facts showing their personal involvement in the alleged constitutional violations and therefore fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. (Id. at 1-2, 7-11.)

In his responsive memorandum and at the hearing, Adams conceded that the claims brought against MNDOC and its employees in their official capacities are barred by the Eleventh Amendment. (See Pl.'s Br. in Opp'n at 1.) Accordingly, the Court recommends that these claims be dismissed. In light of Adams's concession, the only remaining issue before the Court is whether Adams has sufficiently pleaded his claims against Commissioner Roy and Director Hard in their individual capacities.

A. Legal Standard

"To withstand a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, a complaint must contain sufficient factual allegations to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'" Smithrud v. City of St. Paul, 746 F.3d. 391, 397 (8th Cir. 2014) (quoting Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 547 (2007)). "[A]lthough a complaint need not contain 'detailed factual allegations,' it must contain facts with enough specificity 'to raise a right to relief above the speculative level.'" United States ex rel. Raynor v. Nat'l Rural Utils. Coop. Fin., Corp., 690 F.3d 951, 955 (8th Cir. 2012) (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555); see also Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) ("[T]he pleading standard Rule 8 announces does not require 'detailed factual allegations,' but it demands more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation."). "A pleading that offers 'labels and conclusions' or 'a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.'" Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 678 (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555). Similarly, "[t]hreadbare recitals of the elements of a cause of action, supported by mere conclusory statements, do not suffice." Id. "In deciding a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), a court assumes all facts in the complaint to be true and construes all reasonable inferences most favorably to the complainant." Raynor, 690 F.3d at 955.

When considering a motion to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), "the court generally must ignore materials outside the pleadings." Porous Media Corp. v. Pall Corp., 186 F.3d 1077, 1079 (8th Cir. 1999). The court may, however, "consider some materials that are part of the public record or do not contradict the complaint as well as materials that are necessarily embraced by the pleadings." Id. (quotations and citationomitted); see also Illig v. Union Elec. Co., 652 F.3d 971, 976 (8th Cir. 2011) ("In addressing a motion to dismiss, the court may consider the pleadings themselves, materials embraced by the pleadings, exhibits attached to the pleadings, and matters of public record." (quotation omitted)). "[D]ocuments 'necessarily embraced by the complaint' are not matters outside the pleading." Enervations, Inc. v. Minn. Mining & Mfg. Co., 380 F.3d 1066, 1069 (8th Cir. 2004). "[T]he court has complete discretion to determine whether or not to accept any material beyond the pleadings that is offered in conjunction with a Rule 12(b)(6) motion." Stahl v. United States Dep't of Agric., 327 F.3d 697, 701 (8th Cir. 2003) (quotation omitted). Accompanying Adams's opposition is an affidavit of counsel containing four investigative reports and an incident report. (See generally Aff. Identifying Exs., ECF No. 21) The Court has not considered these reports in its analysis. They are not matters of public record and are not embraced by the pleadings. The Court will not presume to place itself in the role of Adams's attorneys by hypothesizing how the information contained in those reports may have been pleaded in the Complaint.

B. Analysis

For his federal civil-rights claims, Adams alleges that Commissioner Roy and Director Hard "failed to investigate, intervene, and require reporting of the improper and illegal activity of . . . Lerro-Miller." (Compl. ¶ 23; see id. ¶¶ 33, 34, 50.) Adams also alleges that "Commissioner [Roy] . . . verbally and physically abused [him], blamed [him] for the sexual encounters, further denying his civil rights, and denied him wantedand needed legal medications for [his] on-going head[ache] problem." (Id. ¶ 25; see id. ¶ 28.)

Adams has alleged only that Commissioner Roy's direct action violated his civil rights. (See id. ¶¶ 25, 28.) The Court's analysis of Adams's § 1983 claims is complicated by the fact that neither party distinguishes between those claims involving an alleged failure by both Commissioner Roy and Director Hard to supervise MCF-Stillwater employees and the allegation that Commissioner Roy directly participated in the alleged constitutional violations.6 For ease of analysis, the Court will separate the supervisory allegations from those alleging Commissioner Roy's direct involvement.

1. § 1983...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT