Price v. Doe

         OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR AN EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A RESPONSE (DKT. 11), REJECTING PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS TO THE COURT'S PREVIOUS ORDER (DKT. 13), DISMISSING THE CLAIM AGAINST JOHN DOE AS UNTIMELY, DENYING PLAINTIFF'S REQUESTS FOR DISCOVERY (DKT. 6), FOR WAIVER OF FEES AND COSTS (DKT. 7), FOR APPOINTMENT OF COUNSEL (DKT. 12, 14), AND TO ALLOW SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADING (DKT. 16), DISMISSING THE COMPLAINT, AND CLOSING THIS CASE

          MARK A. GOLDSMITH United States District Judge

         I. BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff Tyrone Price, a federal inmate currently housed at the Federal Correctional Institution in Manchester, Kentucky, filed a pro se complaint seeking money damages for alleged violations of his constitutional rights. The two defendants named on the face of the complaint were the municipal police department for Saginaw, Michigan, and Covenant Hospital in Saginaw, Michigan. The body of the complaint and exhibits attached to the complaint indicated that Price was also suing Dawn Duranso, who works for the Saginaw Police Department, and a Saginaw police officer identified as “John Doe.”

         Price alleged in his complaint that on March 8, 2015, he was a passenger in a car driven by his pregnant girlfriend, Breanna Blank. Compl. ¶¶ 1-2, 5 (Dkt. 1). Officer John Doe was on duty that day, and he drove his patrol car at a high rate of speed through Saginaw streets without using his headlights or sirens. Id. ¶ 2. John Doe's conduct caused Ms. Blank's car to hit a tree. Id. As a result of the accident, Ms. Blank's unborn child died, and Price sustained injuries to his back and to his right leg. Id. ¶¶ 1, 3-4.

         Price further alleged in the complaint that Dawn Duranso of the Saginaw Police Department refused to send a copy of John Doe's police report to him, id. ¶¶ 7-8, and that staff at Covenant Hospital refused to take x-rays or an MRI of Price's back and leg. Id. ¶ 9. Price stated that he is disabled as a result of the accident. Id. ¶ 11. He claimed that John Doe and Covenant Hospital were deliberately indifferent to his medical needs and liable under the Eighth Amendment for the “unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain.” Id. ¶¶ 4, 6, 10. Price also claimed that Ms. Duranso violated his Fourteenth Amendment right to due process and his First Amendment right to petition the Government for redress of grievances by refusing to send him a copy of the police report for the incident on March 8, 2015. Id. ¶ 8.

         On April 8, 2019, the Court dismissed the Saginaw Police Department, Covenant Hospital, and Dawn Duranso from this action and ordered Price to show cause why his claim against John Doe should not be dismissed as untimely. (Dkt. 9). Now before the Court is Price's response to the Court's order to show cause (Dkt. 13). Also pending before the Court are Price's requests for discovery (Dkt. 6), for waiver of the filing fee (Dkt. 7), for an extension of time to file a response to the Court's previous order (Dkt. 11), for appointment of counsel (Dkt. 12, 14), and to allow supplemental pleading (Dkt. 16). The request for an extension of time is granted, but the other requests are denied, and because the Court has concluded that Price's claim against John Doe is barred by the statute of limitations, the complaint will be dismissed.

         II. ANALYSIS

         A. The Dismissal of the Saginaw Police Department, Covenant Hospital, and Dawn Duranso

         In his response to the Court's order to show cause, Price objects to the Court's dismissal of the Saginaw Police Department, Covenant Hospital, and Dawn Duranso. The Court will treat Price's objections as a motion for reconsideration. This District's Local Rules provide that -

[g]enerally, and without restricting the Court's discretion, the Court will not grant motions for rehearing or reconsideration that merely present the same issues ruled upon by the Court, either expressly or by reasonable implication. The movant must not only demonstrate a palpable defect by which the Court and the parties and other persons entitled to be heard on the motion have been misled but also show that correcting the defect will result in a different disposition of the case.

E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(h)(3). The Court concludes for the following reasons that Price has failed to show a palpable defect in the Court's prior order.

         i. The Saginaw Police Department and City of Saginaw

         Price seeks to hold the Saginaw Police Department or the City of Saginaw liable because John Doe's violation of municipal policies and rules on speed limits and the use of lights and sirens caused his injury. Resp. to Op. & Order at 2 (Dkt. 13). The Police Department, however, is not a legal entity that may be sued under § 1983, Laise v. Utica, 970 F.Supp. 605, 608 (E.D. Mich. 1997), and even though “[l]ocal governing bodies . . . can be sued directly under § 1983, ” Monell v. Dep't of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658, 690 (1978), “a municipality is liable under § 1983 only if the challenged conduct occurs pursuant to a municipality's ‘official policy,' such that the municipality's promulgation or adoption of the policy can be said to have ‘cause[d]' one of its employees to violate the plaintiff's constitutional rights.” D'Ambrosio v. Marino, 747 F.3d 378, 386 (6th Cir. 2014) (citing Monell, 436 U.S. at 692). The facts alleged in Price's complaint indicate that it was John Doe's violation of municipal policies and rules that caused Price's ...