Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Dec. 13, 2024

Goldmann v. Sherburne County Sheriffs Department

Judge
Katherine Menendez
Docket
0:21-cv-02530
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Goldmann v. Sherburne County Sheriffs Department, Judge Menendez adopted an unopposed recommendation, severed Romelle Smith’s case, dismissed remaining claims without prejudice, and closed the case.

Who this affects

Romelle Smith’s claims were separated into a new action and allowed to relate back to November 18, 2021. The remaining plaintiffs’ claims were dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Nicholas Ratkowski and the Contreras Edin law firm were withdrawn as counsel from both actions.

What happened

In Goldmann v. Sherburne County Sheriffs Department, the court reviewed a magistrate judge’s recommendation after no party filed objections. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.

The court separated Romelle Smith’s case from the action and ordered his proposed amended complaint docketed in a new case. Smith’s claims relate back to November 18, 2021. The court dismissed the remaining plaintiffs’ claims without prejudice for failure to prosecute.

Judge Katherine M. Menendez accepted the recommendation in full, ordered the plaintiffs’ counsel withdrawn from both actions, directed the clerk to send Smith case documents and an application to proceed without paying fees, and closed this case.

The detailed version

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

Case
Goldmann v. Sherburne County Sheriffs Department · No. 0:21-cv-02530
Judge
Katherine Menendez
Date
Dec. 13, 2024

Background

The order concerns a Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster on September 17, 2024. No objections were filed within the permitted time. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the events giving rise to them.

Court’s Review

Because no objections were filed, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error rather than conducting a fresh review of the disputed issues. The court concluded that Magistrate Judge Foster committed no error, clear or otherwise, and accepted the recommendation in full.

Rulings

The court ordered the following:

- Romelle Smith’s case was severed from the action, and his Proposed Amended Complaint was to be docketed as the operative complaint in a new action. - Smith’s claims were ordered to relate back to November 18, 2021, the date the original complaint was filed. - The remaining plaintiffs’ claims were dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. This means the dismissal itself did not bar refiling, although the order does not explain any additional requirements for doing so. - Plaintiffs’ counsel, Nicholas Ratkowski and the Contreras Edin law firm, were withdrawn from both this action and Smith’s severed action. - The clerk was directed to mail Smith a copy of the order, the new case number, and an application to proceed without paying filing fees. - The case was closed.

The order does not decide the merits of the underlying claims.

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.