Cherry v. Hennepin County ADC
- Jeffrey Bryan
- 0:24-cv-03951
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Aaron D. Cherry v. Hennepin County ADC, Judge Bryan dismissed the action without prejudice after Cherry failed to complete service forms and update his address.
The dismissal affected self-represented plaintiff Aaron D. Cherry's action against Hennepin County ADC, Sergeant Petrode, Deputy Morad, Deputy Sarsfield, and Deputy Montean. The action was dismissed without prejudice.
What happened
Aaron D. Cherry sued Hennepin County ADC, Sergeant Petrode, Deputy Morad, Deputy Sarsfield, and Deputy Montean. The magistrate judge recommended dismissing the action because Cherry was representing himself and had not completed U.S. Marshal service forms for each defendant or provided an updated mailing address as ordered.
Cherry did not object to the recommendation before the deadline. The court therefore reviewed it for a clear mistake and found none.
Judge Jeffrey M. Bryan adopted the recommendation and dismissed the action without prejudice. The order directed that judgment be entered.
The detailed version
- Cherry v. Hennepin County ADC · No. 0:24-cv-03951
- Jeffrey M. Bryan
- Feb. 20, 2025
Background
Aaron D. Cherry brought this action against Hennepin County ADC, Sergeant Petrode, Deputy Morad, Deputy Sarsfield, and Deputy Montean. Cherry was representing himself. The matter came before the court on a report and recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung on January 22, 2025.
The recommendation stated that the action should be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). It relied on Cherry's failure to submit completed U.S. Marshal service forms for each defendant and to provide an updated mailing address, as required by the magistrate judge's December 18, 2024 order.
Review of the Recommendation
Cherry did not object to the report and recommendation, and the deadline for objections had passed. Because there were no timely objections, Judge Bryan reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning a clear mistake in the magistrate judge's decision. The court found no clear error.
Ruling
The court adopted the report and recommendation and dismissed the action without prejudice. It also directed that judgment be entered. The order did not make a ruling on the underlying claims against the defendants.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.