Charles Ray Johnson v. Norman Rinehart

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of South Dakota granted Charles Ray Johnson leave to proceed in forma pauperis but dismissed without prejudice his claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Fair Housing Act. The court held that the complaint lacked sufficient factual allegations supporting disability discrimination, race discrimination, or retaliation. The court also denied Johnson’s motion to appoint counsel as moot.

Holdings

1. Johnson's financial affidavit established that he had insufficient funds to pay the filing fee, so the court granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
2. The court was required to dismiss claims that were frivolous or malicious, failed to state a claim, or sought monetary relief from an immune defendant.
3. Johnson's Title II ADA claims were not cognizable against Rinehart because he named only a private individual and did not identify a public entity.
4. Johnson failed to state an ADA claim because he alleged no facts establishing that he had a disability within the meaning of the ADA.
5. Johnson failed to state FHA disparate-treatment claims based on race or disability because he alleged no specific facts showing less favorable treatment because of a protected characteristic and did not allege facts establishing a disability.
6. Johnson failed to state an FHA disability-accommodation claim because he did not allege facts establishing that he was disabled within the meaning of the FHA.
7. Johnson failed to state an FHA retaliation claim because he did not allege facts showing protected activity, the defendant's knowledge, retaliatory motive, or a causal connection between protected activity and adverse action.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Johnson was entitled to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1).
2. Whether the complaint stated a cognizable ADA claim against the privately named individual defendant.
3. Whether the complaint alleged sufficient facts to state FHA disparate-treatment, disability-accommodation, or retaliation claims.
4. Whether appointment of counsel was appropriate after dismissal of all claims.

Disposition

other