United States District Court, D. Minnesota
REPORT & RECOMMENDATION
N. Leung United States Magistrate Judge
matter comes before the Court on pro se Plaintiff Herbert
Pitts's Motion for Reconsideration Under Local Rule
7.1(j) (ECF No. 49). This motion has been referred to the
undersigned for a report and recommendation to the district
court, the Honorable Michael J. Davis, District Judge for the
United States District Court for the District of Minnesota,
under 28 U.S.C. § 636 and D. Minn. LR 72.1. (ECF No.
53.) Plaintiff has also filed two requests for a hearing on
his motion. (ECF Nos. 55, 56.)
upon the files, records, and proceedings herein, and having
concluded that no hearing is necessary, IT IS HEREBY
RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's motion for
reconsideration and requests for a hearing be
The Undersigned's Report & Recommendation
brought this action against Defendants Ramsey County, St.
Paul Police Department, and Lt. (Unknown), “alleging
excessive force, deliberate indifference to his medical
needs, failure to investigate, and failure to train.”
Pitts v. Ramsey Cty., No. 17-cv-4261 (MJD/TNL), 2018
WL 3118437, at *1 (D. Minn. May 23, 2018) [hereinafter
Pitts I], adopting report and
recommendation, 2018 WL 3118293 (D. Minn. June 25, 2018)
[hereinafter Pitts II], appeal dismissed,
No. 18-2797, 2019 WL 719006 (8th Cir. Jan. 25, 2019)
[hereinafter Pitts III]. In brief, Plaintiff alleged
that Lt. (Unknown), a St. Paul police officer, yelled at him,
called him derogatory names, and beat him with a baton while
he was handcuffed in July 2015. Pitts I, 2018 WL
3118437, at *1. Plaintiff alleged that he was injured as a
result. Id. Plaintiff further alleged that he was
subsequently transferred to the Ramsey County jail and
workhouse, where he was treated for his injuries.
Id. Plaintiff alleged that although he reported the
incident and an investigation was begun, the investigation
did not progress any further than identifying a video of the
moved for dismissal of Plaintiff's claims. See
generally id. The undersigned recommended that the
motions to dismiss be granted. See generally id.
respect to Ramsey County, the undersigned stated that,
“[b]y failing to allege any claims against Ramsey
County in the ‘Amended Complaint,' Plaintiff ha[d]
abandoned his claims against Ramsey County.”
Id. at *5. The undersigned nevertheless went on to
consider and recommend dismissal of Plaintiff's claims
against Ramsey County for failure to investigate and
deliberate indifference to his medical needs. Id. at
Plaintiff's claim for deliberate indifference to his
medial needs, the undersigned concluded that Plaintiff failed
to allege sufficient facts under both the objective and
subjective components of this claim. See Id. at *7.
Plaintiff had “not alleged any facts showing the
objective seriousness of his injuries” or “that
he showed obvious signs of injury which went untreated or
that he requested medical treatment for his injuries and was
denied.” Id. Plaintiff also had “not
alleged facts showing that Ramsey County was aware of
Plaintiff's need for further medical attention . . . and
failed to act.” Id. And, “even assuming
. . . that Plaintiff's non-specific ‘injuries'
constituted objectively serious medical needs, Plaintiff
ha[d] not allege[d] facts from which it c[ould] plausibly be
inferred that Ramsey County actually knew of, but
deliberately disregarded, those needs.” Id.
the undersigned concluded that Plaintiff had failed to
identify any particular policy or custom of Ramsey County
causing either of these alleged deprivations. Id. at
*6, 7. The undersigned recommended that Ramsey County's
motion to dismiss be granted, and Plaintiff's claims
against Ramsey County be dismissed without
prejudice. Id. at *11.
City of St. Paul
respect to the St. Paul Police Department and Lt. (Unknown),
the undersigned recommended that all claims against the St.
Paul Police Department be dismissed with prejudice
because “[t]he St. Paul Police Department is not a
legal entity subject to suit.” Id. at *7.
Similarly, the undersigned also recommended that any claim
for intentional infliction of emotional distress be dismissed
with prejudice as time-barred by the two-year
statute of limitations. Id. at *11. The undersigned