Dillard v. Schnell

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Latrice Atik Dillard,
Plaintiff,
v.
Paul Schnell, Commissioner of
Corrections (Minnesota Department of
Corrections) and Nannette Larson, Dept.
Commissioner,
Defendants.
Case No. 26-cv-57 (KMM/DLM)
ORDER
On February 6, 2026, this Court recommended that this matter be dismissed due to
plaintiff Latrice Atik Dillard’s failure to prosecute this matter. (Doc. 5.) Ms. Dillard had
failed to pay the $18.20 initial partial filing fee previously ordered by this Court, and the
deadline for paying that fee had expired.
Later that same day, however, the Court received a letter from Ms. Dillard asking
for additional time in which to pay the initial partial filing fee. (See Doc. 6.) Because it is
clear that Ms. Dillard does intend to prosecute this matter, this Court will vacate the
February 6, 2026 Report and Recommendation. The deadline for Ms. Dillard to pay the
initial partial filing fee of $18.20 is extended to March 2, 2026. Failure to pay the initial
partial filing fee by that date may result in a renewed recommendation that this matter be
dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
CASE 0:26-cv-00057-KMM-DLM Doc. 8 Filed 02/09/26 Page 1 of 3

2
Ms. Dillard’s letter to the Court also raises three issues that require clarification at
this time. First, Ms. Dillard asks that the Court contact the prison at which she now resides
and ask that prison officials permit her to pay the initial partial filing fee for this matter
from her gate savings account. Whether payment of legal fees from gate savings is
permitted under Minnesota Department of Corrections Policy is not an issue before the
Court in this litigation and will not be addressed. That said, Ms. Dillard’s initial partial
filing fee was calculated without reference to deposits to that account or the average
balance of that account. Accordingly, Ms. Dillard should be able to pay—or, at the very
least, has not demonstrated that she has no assets and no means from which to pay—the
$18.20 initial partial filing fee in this matter from assets available in his spending accounts.
See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b).
Second, Ms. Dillard asks that the Court “file an order preventing facility from
unsealing correspondence.” (Doc. 6.) As a general matter, documents mailed to the Court
from a litigant or to a litigant from the Court, do not constitute “legal mail” subject to legal
protection from unsealing outside of the inmate’s presence. Cf. Beaulieu v. Ludeman, 690
F.3d 1017, 1037 (8th Cir. 2012) (noting that prisoner-attorney communications cannot be
inspected by prison officials outside the presence of the prisoner). Thus, Ms. Dillard’s
request is denied, at least to the extent it relates to mail originating from, or addressed to,
the Court.
Third, Ms. Dillard asks that an attorney be appointed to represent her in this matter.
(Doc. 6.) No formal motion for appointment of counsel is yet before the Court, and the
CASE 0:26-cv-00057-KMM-DLM Doc. 8 Filed 02/09/26 Page 2 of 3

3
question of whether counsel should be appointed will be postponed until after such a
motion has been filed—and after Ms. Dillard’s initial partial filing fee has been paid.
ORDER
Based on the foregoing, and on all of the files, records, and proceedings in this
case, IT IS ORDERED that:
1. 	The February 6, 2026 Report and Recommendation (Doc. 5) is VACATED.
2. 	Plaintiff Latrice Atik Dillard must pay an initial partial filing fee of at least
$18.20 by no later than March 2, 2026, failing which it may be recommended
that this matter be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Dated: February 9, 2026 	_s/Douglas L. Micko____________
Douglas L. Micko
United States Magistrate Judge
CASE 0:26-cv-00057-KMM-DLM Doc. 8 Filed 02/09/26 Page 3 of 3