Traylor v. Witte
- Paul Magnuson
- 0:24-cv-04150
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Traylor v. Witte, Judge Magnuson adopted the recommendation, dismissing most claims without prejudice while allowing excessive-force and failure-to-intervene claims to proceed.
Rayco Traylor’s claims against the defendants: all claims were dismissed without prejudice except the specified excessive-force claims against Lt. Witte and Lt. Hills and the specified failure-to-intervene claims against Lt. Hills and Ofc. Kamaldeen.
What happened
In Traylor v. Witte, the court reviewed a magistrate judge’s recommendation addressing Rayco Traylor’s claims against correctional and health-services defendants. The recommendation said several claims should be dismissed for not stating a legally sufficient claim, while two categories of claims should continue.
Neither party objected to the recommendation. Because there were no objections, the court reviewed it for clear error and found none. The court therefore adopted the recommendation.
Judge Paul A. Magnuson ordered that all of Traylor’s claims be dismissed without prejudice except for the excessive-force claims against Lt. Witte and Lt. Hills in their individual capacities and the failure-to-intervene claims against Lt. Hills and Ofc. Kamaldeen in their individual capacities.
The detailed version
- Traylor v. Witte · No. 0:24-cv-04150
- Paul Magnuson
- Mar. 12, 2025
Background
The court considered a February 12, 2025, Report and Recommendation (R&R) by United States Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty. The R&R recommended dismissing several of Rayco Traylor’s claims for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. It recommended allowing two categories of claims to proceed: excessive-force claims against Defendants Lt. Witte and Lt. Hills in their individual capacities, and failure-to-intervene claims against Defendants Lt. Hills and Ofc. Kamaldeen in their individual capacities.
Review of the R&R
Neither party filed objections, and the objection period had expired. The court therefore reviewed the R&R for clear error rather than conducting a de novo review of specific objections. The court stated that it found no error, clear or otherwise, in Judge Docherty’s reasoning.
Ruling
The court adopted the R&R. It ordered that all of Plaintiff Rayco Traylor’s claims in the complaint be dismissed without prejudice, except for the specified excessive-force claims against Lt. Witte and Lt. Hills and the specified failure-to-intervene claims against Lt. Hills and Ofc. Kamaldeen. The opinion does not identify the legal basis for the claims beyond these descriptions.
Classification
This is a procedural order because the dismissals were based on failure to state a claim, which is a threshold pleading determination rather than a decision on the underlying merits.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.