Rickmyer v. Browne

Decision Date05 February 2014
Docket NumberCase No. 13–cv–559 (SRN/LIB).
Citation995 F.Supp.2d 989
PartiesPeter RICKMYER, Plaintiff, v. Michael (Kip) BROWNE; Megan Goodmundson; Dan Rother; Robert Hodson; John George Hubbard, II; Dave Haddy; Ann McCandless; David Schooler; John Willard Hoff; William McDonald; Jordan Area Community Council, Inc., Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of Minnesota

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Peter Rickmyer, Pro Se Plaintiff.

David J. McGee and Christopher P. Renz, Thomsen & Nybeck, PA, Bloomington, MN, for Defendants Michael (Kip) Browne, Megan Goodmundson, Dan Rother, Robert Hodson, John George Hubbard II, Dave Haddy, Ann McCandless, and Jordan Area Community Council, Inc.

Michael C. Wilhelm, Briggs & Morgan, PA, Minneapolis, MN, for Defendant David Schooler.

Paul Allen Godfread, Godfread Law Firm, Woodbury, MN, for Defendant John Willard Hoff.

Julie K. Bowman, Hennepin County Attorney's Office, Minneapolis, MN, for Defendant William McDonald.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

SUSAN RICHARD NELSON, District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

This matter is before the Court for consideration of Plaintiff's Objections [Doc. No. 191] to United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois's January 7, 2014, Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) [Doc. No. 189]. The Magistrate Judge denied Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel [Doc. No. 3] and Amended Motion to Appoint Counsel [Doc. No. 110]. The Magistrate Judge also recommended that: (1) Defendant Hoff's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 19] be granted in part and denied in part, and Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Hoff (Counts 1, 2, and 4) be dismissed with prejudice; (2) Defendant Jordan Area Community Council's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 64] be granted, and Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Jordan Area Community Council be dismissed with prejudice; (3) Defendant Schooler's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 53] be granted, and Plaintiff's claim against Defendant Schooler be dismissed with prejudice; (4) Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Complaint [Doc. No. 171] be denied in its entirety, except as to Defendant McDonald; and (5) Defendant Schooler's Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions [Doc. No. 122] be granted. (Jan. 7, 2014, Report and Recommendation at 1034–35 [Doc. No. 189].) For the reasons set forth below, the Court overrules Plaintiff's Objections and adopts the R & R in its entirety with one exception—Plaintiff's claim against Defendant Schooler is dismissed without prejudice.

II. BACKGROUND

The Magistrate Judge's R & R documents the factual and procedural background of this case, and the Court incorporates it by reference.

A. Factual Background

Plaintiff Peter Rickmyer has multiple convictions in Minnesota and Oklahoma state courts for sexual contact with young boys. See In re Rickmyer, 519 N.W.2d 188, 189 (Minn.1994). At least some of Plaintiff's claims in this case arise from his belief that certain Defendants conspired to have his parole revoked. The facts of this case relate to prior litigation involving Plaintiff and Defendants, including:

Rickmyer v. Hubbard, No. 27–cv–09–10939, in Hennepin County, Minnesota;

Rickmyer v. Hoff, No. 27–cv–09–30329, in Hennepin County, Minnesota; • Rickmyer v. Hodson, No. 27–cv–10–3378, in Hennepin County, Minnesota;

Rickmyer v. Roy, No. 27–cv–11–11012, in Hennepin County, Minnesota;

Stephenson v. Roy, No. 02–cv–11–3668 in Anoka County, Minnesota;

Wells Fargo v. Clark, No. 12–cv–2621 in United States District Court for the District of Minnesota;

Rickmyer v. Browne, No. 13–cv–141 in United States District Court for the District of Minnesota; and

Rickmyer v. Jordan Area Community Council, Inc., No. 13–cv–2900 in United States District Court for the District of Minnesota.

(Jan. 7, 2014, Report and Recommendation at 1004–08 [Doc. No. 189].)

1. Allegations against Defendants Hoff, McDonald, and JACC

Plaintiff lives in Hennepin County, Minnesota and is an eligible member of the Jordan Area Community Council (JACC). Between February 2009 and April 2009, he attended JACC Board and Finance Committee meetings, during which he was outspoken about certain issues. Plaintiff generally alleges that the JACC “became interested in running me out of my neighborhood and ultimately depriving me of my liberty,” and the JACC began retaliating against him. JACC allegedly “authorized [Defendant] Hubbard and [Defendant] Haddy to come to my house in May of 2009 knowing they were not welcomed and making false allegations.” On July 22, 2009, Defendant Michael Browne's wife allegedly contacted Plaintiff's parole officer to obtain a copy of Plaintiff's conditions of release. The next day, Plaintiff was arrested for parole violations.

Plaintiff asserts that on or about November 15, 2009, Defendant John Willard Hoff joined in the conspiracy and retaliation by blogging about Plaintiff and communicating with Plaintiff's parole agent, Bobbie C. Jones. In February 2010, after Plaintiff filed the Rickmyer v. Hodson lawsuit in state court, Defendants Hoff and Megan Goodmundson allegedly wrote blog posts and communicated further with Parole Agent Jones. Plaintiff claims that when Parole Agent Jones refused to retaliate against him, Defendants Hoff and Browne conspired to “bully agent Jones off my case.”

Plaintiff generally alleges that the JACC, in a conspiracy with Defendant William McDonald, committed fraud in Rickmyer v. Hodson. Plaintiff also believes that Defendant Browne prohibited him from amending a pleading in Rickmyer v. Hodson, in order to ensure that Plaintiff would lose at summary judgment. Plaintiff further alleges that, while he was working on an appeal of an order that declared him to be a frivolous litigant, Defendant Hoff “on behalf of the JACC group harassed and stalked” Plaintiff at the public law library and used an unnamed person “to gather drafts from tables and wastebaskets ... allowing Hoff to glean that I was working on an appeal.” Plaintiff states that he “was forced to abandon [his] appeal because there was no way/place I could work on it.”

In June 2010, Plaintiff filed a complaint against the JACC with the Minnesota Department of Civil Rights, which allegedly triggered a new round of blog posts, conspiratorial communications among Defendants JACC, Hoff, and McDonald that continued until May 2013. Plaintiff claims that in March 2011, Defendant McDonald communicated ex parte with the judge in Rickmyer v. Hodson. On March 9, 2011, Plaintiff was arrested, and he maintains that he has been “in custody (incarcerated, house arrest and or curfew) since then.

Finally, Plaintiff alleges that Defendants failed to inform the state court in Rickmyer v. Roy that they had committed fraud in Rickmyer v. Hodson.

2. Factual Allegations against Defendant Schooler

In Rickmeyer v. Hodson, Plaintiff brought claims alleging defamation, intentional interference with contracts, discrimination, harassment, loss of liberty, loss of free speech, trespassing, and aiding and abetting against Hoff, Schooler, the JACC, and others. The claims against Schooler were dismissed under a confidential settlement agreement. Plaintiff now alleges that during a state court hearing on May 16, 2012, Defendant Schooler violated the settlement agreement by describing Plaintiff as Schooler's “personal stalker” and seeking to remove Plaintiff from the courtroom—acts that “publicly vilified and humiliated” Plaintiff.

B. Procedural History

Plaintiff filed this suit on March 11, 2013, and he amended his Complaint on March 15, 2013. On May 6, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint [Doc. No. 7]—the operative complaint at this time—asserting the following claims: (1) violations of 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985, 1986, and 12203 against Defendants Hoff, McDonald, and the JACC (Count 1); (2) “intentional interference with contract” against Defendants Hoff, McDonald, and the JACC when they allegedly interfered with his “contract” with the Minnesota Department of Corrections (Count 2); (3) “breach of settlement agreement contract” against Defendant Schooler (Count 3); and (4) seeking default judgment in a Minnesota state court case, 27 cv–10–3378, against Defendant Hoff.

On May 30, 2013, Defendant McDonald filed his Answer [Doc. No. 11]. On June 7, 2013, Defendant Hoff filed a Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 19]. On June 26, 2013, Defendant Schooler filed a Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 53]. On July 1, 2013, Defendant JACC filed a Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 64]. On July 17, 2013, Plaintiff moved for default judgment [Doc. No. 84]. On August 14, 2013, Defendant Schooler moved for Rule 11 sanctions [Doc. No. 122]. On August 23, 2013, Plaintiff filed a “Third Amended Complaint” [Doc. No. 138]. On December 13, 2013, Plaintiff filed a “Fourth Amended Complaint” [Doc. No. 171].

On September 3, 2013, United States Magistrate Judge Steven E. Rau held a hearing on these motions. Magistrate Judge Rau ruled from the bench that Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel [Doc. No. 3] and his Amended Motion to Appoint Attorney [Doc. No. 110] were denied for reasons stated on the record. Magistrate Judge Rau also disclosed that he had represented Defendant Schooler many years ago. Plaintiff asked that Magistrate Judge Rau recuse himself, which he did on September 13, 2013. The case was reassigned to Magistrate Judge Jeffrey J. Keyes, who also recused himself. The case was ultimately reassigned to Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois, who denied Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel [Doc. No. 3] and his Amended Motion to Appoint Counsel [Doc. No. 110]. Magistrate Judge Brisbois also recommended that: (1) Defendant Hoff's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 19] be granted in part and denied in part, and Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Hoff (Counts 1, 2, and 4) be dismissed with prejudice; (2) Defendant JACC's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 64] be granted, and Plaintiff's claims against Defendant JACC (Counts 1 and 2) be dismissed with prejudice; (3) Defendant Schooler's Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 53] be granted, and Plaintiff's claim against Defendant Schooler ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Xiong v. Colvin
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota
    • 5 Febrero 2014
  • Sabri v. Whittier Alliance, Civil No. 15–1578 ADM/SER.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota
    • 10 Agosto 2015
    ...has already concluded that a neighborhood organization is not a governmental entity subject to § 1983 liability. Rickmyer v. Browne, 995 F.Supp.2d 989, 999 (D.Minn.2014). The organization at issue in Rickmyer was the Jordan Area Community Council, Inc., which, like Whittier Alliance, is a n......
  • Waldorf v. Dayton, Court File No. 17-cv-107 (JRT/LIB)
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota
    • 6 Junio 2017
    ...requirements applicable to his Motion prior to filing it, the Court denies the Motion, [Docket No. 57]. See, Rickmyer v. Browne, 995 F. Supp. 2d 989, 1026 (D. Minn. 2014) (stating that it could deny a plaintiff's motion to amend for failure to file a proposed amended complaint that illustra......
  • Amisi v. Melick, CIV 15-4083
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of South Dakota
    • 8 Mayo 2017
    ...some policy, custom or practice that allegedly caused a violation of the claimant's constitutional rights." Rickmyer v. Browne, 995 F.Supp.2d 989, 1030 (D. Minn. 2014) (emphasis in original); see also Monell v. Dept. of Social Servs. of City of New York, 436 U.S. 658 (1978) (finding that a ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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