Krych v. MSOP-ML

Background

The parties reached a settlement after an October 7, 2024 settlement conference. They filed a stipulation of dismissal, and the district judge dismissed the action with prejudice on November 20, 2024.

The court considered Chris Krych’s “Pro-se letter Motion for Formal Resolutions,” together with later letters, as a motion to enforce the settlement agreement. Krych asked the court to order Dakota County Court Judge Michael Mayer to provide certified transcripts from proceedings in May and October 2006. He also asked the court to require defendants to take additional actions under the settlement, including resending letters to Pam Bondi and Lisa Kirkpatrick and continuing to contact Dakota County court administrators about a March 9, 2006 hearing transcript.

Court’s analysis

The court held that it could not enforce the settlement against Judge Mayer because he was not a party to either the lawsuit or the settlement agreement. The court therefore could not order him to produce the requested transcripts. The order noted that Krych could seek relief from the Dakota County court independently of this action.

The court also denied Krych’s request to require defendants to resend letters to Bondi and Kirkpatrick. The settlement required defendants to send the letters to Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, United States Attorney General Merrick Garland, United States Attorney for the District of Minnesota Andy Luger, and the Minnesota Board of Judicial Standards. Bondi and Kirkpatrick were not included because they did not hold their current titles when the parties reached the settlement. The court found that defendants mailed the letters in sufficient time for Garland and Luger to receive them before the changes in administration and had complied with the settlement’s terms.

The court further denied Krych’s request to require defendants to continue seeking the March 9, 2006 transcript. The settlement required defendants to search Minnesota Government Access records, contact Judge Mayer’s chambers and Dakota County court administrators, and validate Krych’s efforts if he contacted the administrators himself. The court found that defendants had made reasonable efforts and had no additional obligation under the settlement. Krych’s dissatisfaction with the results did not require defendants to do more.

Disposition

Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster ordered that Krych’s “Pro-se letter Motion for Formal Resolutions” was denied. The order addressed enforcement of the settlement and did not reopen the underlying action.