Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Substantive rulingFiled Sept. 13, 2024

Meranelli v. Pruette

Judge
Jerry Blackwell
Docket
0:23-cv-02260
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Summary JudgmentEvidence
In one sentence

In Meranelli v. Pruette, Judge Blackwell accepted the magistrate judge’s report, denied an evidence-exclusion motion, and denied summary judgment without prejudice.

Who this affects

Cherrity Honesty-Alexis Meranelli and Jesse Ryan Pruette, as well as the other named defendants to the extent they are affected by the pending case.

What happened

In Meranelli v. Pruette, Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a report and recommendation on August 21, 2024. No party filed a timely objection.

The district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none. It concerned the plaintiff’s motion to exclude her deposition transcript, Amanda Hyke’s declaration, and Hyke’s testimony, as well as the defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

Judge Jerry W. Blackwell accepted the report and recommendation, denied the plaintiff’s motion to exclude the evidence, and denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment without prejudice.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Meranelli v. Pruette · No. 0:23-cv-02260
Judge
Jerry W. Blackwell
Date
Sept. 13, 2024

Background

United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a report and recommendation on August 21, 2024. The opinion identifies Cherrity Honesty-Alexis Meranelli as the plaintiff and Jesse Ryan Pruette, along with Jane Does and John Does, as defendants. Pruette was sued in his official and individual capacities.

Motions and Review

The plaintiff moved to exclude her deposition transcript, Amanda Hyke’s declaration, and Hyke’s testimony. The defendant moved for summary judgment, which is a request for judgment without a trial when the governing legal standard is met. No timely objections were filed to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the district court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error.

Ruling

The district court found no clear error and accepted the August 21, 2024 report and recommendation. It denied the plaintiff’s motion to exclude the identified evidence. It also denied the defendant’s motion for summary judgment without prejudice.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.