Garrett v. Morgan County Sheriff's Office, 1:23-cv-02011

Background

On October 20, 2021 Nathan Garrett, an Ohio National Guard (ONG) soldier, was found fatally shot at an off‑base cabin after a night of drinking and firearms handling; other soldiers present allegedly played a risky "dry‑fire/Russian‑roulette" game and later gave inconsistent statements.
Plaintiff Lisa Garrett (as estate administrator) sued multiple defendants, asserting § 1983 backward‑looking denial‑of‑access and civil‑conspiracy claims, several Ohio criminal/tort claims (obstruction of justice, using weapons while intoxicated, negligent retention, civil conspiracy), and a FOIA claim seeking ONG documents and fees.
Plaintiff alleges MCSO and ONG personnel failed to secure evidence, allowed soldiers to coordinate stories, and otherwise obstructed and impeded identification/prosecution of the shooter, prejudicing any state remedy.
The United States filed a Notice of Substitution certifying that three ONG officers were acting in federal status; ONG and individual ONG officers moved to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
The court denied Plaintiff’s late Motion to Supplement evidentiary materials, dismissed all § 1983 official‑capacity and pendent state‑law claims against the ONG and the three officers on Eleventh Amendment sovereign‑immunity grounds, dismissed all individual‑capacity claims against the three officers for failure to plead individual conduct (and as waived/subject to other defenses), and left only the FOIA fee/costs claim (to be prosecuted against the United States) pending with an order for a fee motion.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Motion to supplement opposition with documents obtained later	Documents (notarized statements, logs) contradict officers' declarations and show their involvement; should be considered	Motion untimely; exhibits are not properly considered on Rule 12(b)(6) motion; no justification for delay	Denied (untimely; Court will not consider those materials for the 12(b)(6) analysis)
Whether ONG and officers in official capacities are subject to suit under § 1983 / state claims (Eleventh Amendment)	ONG is a state actor for § 1983/state claims; dismissal on immunity grounds is premature and factual record should develop; ONG waived immunity by litigation conduct	Eleventh Amendment bars money damages against state and official‑capacity defendants; ONG timely raised immunity; no waiver	Dismissed under Rule 12(b)(1) for Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity (all § 1983 official‑capacity and pendent state claims)
Individual‑capacity § 1983 and state claims against Wilker, Gillum, Bogan	Amended Complaint alleges ONG defendants removed soldiers from scene, coordinated stories, failed to investigate — sufficient to tie each officer to misconduct; qualified immunity not proper at pleading stage	Complaint fails to plead personal involvement or specific acts by each officer; group pleading insufficient; qualified immunity/FTCA defenses apply	Dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to plead individual involvement (and, alternatively, qualified immunity)
FOIA claim, substitution of United States, and attorney’s‑fees request	FOIA relief sought (production + statutory penalties/fees); Plaintiff says ONG forced multi‑forum litigation and is entitled to fees	ONG concedes production; argues FOIA claim for production is moot; fees premature and must be supported	ONG is federal actor re: FOIA; production issues resolved — partial mootness; FOIA claim survives only as fee/costs claim against United States; Clerk to substitute U.S.; Plaintiff ordered to file supported fee motion within 30 days

Key Cases Cited

Jackson v. City of Cleveland, 64 F.4th 736 (6th Cir. 2023) (articulating elements of backward‑looking denial‑of‑access claim)
Flagg v. City of Detroit, 715 F.3d 165 (6th Cir. 2013) (denial‑of‑access framework; forward vs. backward claims)
Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232 (U.S. 1974) (discussing individual v. official capacity and early qualified immunity analysis)
Harlow v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 800 (U.S. 1982) (objective qualified immunity standard)
Will v. Michigan Dep't of State Police, 491 U.S. 58 (U.S. 1989) (states/officials in official capacity not "persons" under § 1983)
Lapides v. Board of Regents of the Univ. Sys. of Ga., 535 U.S. 613 (U.S. 2002) (waiver of sovereign immunity through litigation conduct)
Kerchen v. Univ. of Michigan, 100 F.4th 751 (6th Cir. 2024) (district court must resolve sovereign‑immunity before discovery)
Ku v. Tennessee, 322 F.3d 431 (6th Cir. 2003) (examples where state litigation conduct amounted to waiver)
Experimental Holdings, Inc. v. Farris, 503 F.3d 514 (6th Cir. 2007) (pendent state law claims against state officials in official capacity barred by Eleventh Amendment)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (U.S. 2009) (plausibility pleading standard)