Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled May 1, 2025

Witherspoon v. Lionberger

Judge
Laura Provinzino
Docket
0:25-cv-00764
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Witherspoon v. Lionberger, Judge Provinzino dismissed Witherspoon’s amended complaint without prejudice for failure to state a claim.

Who this affects

Princeton Witherspoon, Kathy Lionberger, and the institution having custody of Witherspoon, which was ordered to collect and remit payments toward the filing fee.

What happened

In Witherspoon v. Lionberger, the court reviewed a magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss Princeton Witherspoon’s complaint for failure to state a claim. No party objected to the recommendation.

Because there were no objections, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none. The opinion does not describe the complaint’s underlying allegations or explain why it failed to state a claim.

Judge Laura M. Provinzino adopted the recommendation in full and dismissed the amended complaint without prejudice. The court also ordered the institution holding Witherspoon to collect monthly payments toward his $350 filing fee and send notice of those payment obligations to that institution.

The detailed version

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

Case
Witherspoon v. Lionberger · No. 0:25-cv-00764
Judge
Laura M. Provinzino
Date
May 1, 2025

Background

The matter concerned Princeton Witherspoon’s amended complaint against Kathy Lionberger. United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz issued a March 27, 2025 Report and Recommendation recommending dismissal for failure to state a claim. The opinion does not provide the allegations in the amended complaint or identify the legal basis of the claim.

Review of the Recommendation

No party objected to the Report and Recommendation. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(2), the court therefore reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake. The court found no clear error and adopted the recommendation in full.

Ruling

Judge Laura M. Provinzino ordered that the amended complaint be dismissed without prejudice. The court separately ordered the institution having custody of Witherspoon to collect and remit monthly payments under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2) until the $350 filing fee is paid in full. The order states that 20 percent of the preceding month’s income credited to Witherspoon’s institutional account must be forwarded each time the account balance exceeds $10. The Clerk of Court was ordered to send notice of these payment obligations to the institution where Witherspoon is incarcerated.

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.