BRYCE SUCHAN, MICHAEL GABRIO, Civil JOSEPH D. THORNBLAD, JOSEPH J. PEDERSON, PETER NELSEN, SHAWN CURRY-RAKESH, and MATTHEW REESE, Plaintiffs,
COMMISSION OF HUMAN SERVICES LUCINDA JESSON, ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, CHAD PORTNER, and CAROL OLSON, Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
JEFFREY J. KEYES, Magistrate Judge.
This case is before the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge on the application of Plaintiff Michael Gabrio for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ("IFP"), as permitted by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). (Docket No. 2.) The matter has been referred to this Court for report and recommendation under 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Rule 72.1. For the reasons discussed below, the Court will recommend that Plaintiff Gabrio's IFP application be denied, and that this action be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
It appears that all seven of the named Plaintiffs in this case are patients at the St. Peter Regional Treatment Center in St. Peter, Minnesota. It further appears that all seven Plaintiffs are involuntarily confined at that facility pursuant to civil commitment proceedings conducted under Minnesota state law.
The caption of Plaintiffs' complaint indicates that they are attempting to bring their present lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Two Defendants are listed in the caption of the complaint - Minnesota Commissioner of Human Services Lucinda Jesson, and "Attorney General." Two other Defendants - Chad Portner and Carol Olson - are mentioned elsewhere in the complaint.
The substantive allegations of the complaint are presented on a three-page attachment. Plaintiffs allege that:
"[S]taff teams" are "making the patients people around this Minnesota security hospital to do an autobiography and also relapse prevention plan which mean the staff just wants to be nosy to know about us because the staff are busy-buddies and they will not let any of us leave this hospital unless we do these autobiography and the relapse prevention plan."
It is further alleged that:
"Chad Portner and the other unit directors also make rules that we need to go to (community meeting and walking group) and if we do not go to either of these two then we get punished and that means we have to stay in this hospital for another 45 day because each day we get a (red mark) which means punishment (the red mark) it means an extra 45 days. So we have to go to community meeting and walking group or else....
As far as community meeting and walking group to walk around in the gym it should only be optional if the patient does not want to get up for community meeting or walking group they should have to not do that if they do not want to."
The complaint also includes a vague allegation that "one staff member can overrule the team and the unit director, " and impose "punishment" on patients for matters that do not involve "assaultive" conduct or "making terroristic threats."
The "Request for Relief" section of the complaint simply states: "I want my freedom legally."
An IFP application will be denied, and the action will be dismissed, if the IFP applicant has filed a complaint that fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii); Atkinson ...