Amos v. Kelly
- Jerry Blackwell
- 0:22-cv-02108
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Amos v. Kelly, Judge Blackwell granted summary judgment for both defendant officers, dismissing all of Howard Amos's claims with prejudice.
Plaintiff Howard W. Amos, whose claims against the two named defendants are permanently barred by the with-prejudice dismissal. The defendants, Ryan Kelly and Kurtis Schoonover (likely law enforcement or government officials based on the individual/official capacity framing), prevail entirely.
What happened
In Amos v. Kelly (Civil No. 22-2108), plaintiff Howard W. Amos sued two individuals — Ryan Kelly and Kurtis Schoonover — in both their personal and official capacities. A magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation on July 15, 2025, recommending that the defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted. Amos did not file any objections to that recommendation within the allowed time.
Because no objections were filed, the district court reviewed the magistrate judge's report only for clear error — a less intensive review than if objections had been raised. The court found no clear error in the magistrate judge's analysis and accepted the report in full.
Judge Jerry W. Blackwell granted the defendants' Amended Motion for Summary Judgment and dismissed all claims against Ryan Kelly and Kurtis Schoonover with prejudice, meaning Amos cannot refile these claims in federal court. The entire action was also dismissed with prejudice.
The detailed version
- Amos v. Kelly · No. 0:22-cv-02108
- Jerry W. Blackwell
- Aug. 4, 2025
Background
Plaintiff Howard W. Amos filed suit against Ryan Kelly and Kurtis Schoonover, named in both their individual and official capacities. The opinion does not detail the underlying facts or the nature of Amos's claims; it functions solely as an order accepting a magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation (R&R) and disposing of a summary judgment motion.
Procedural History
United States Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko issued an R&R on July 15, 2025 (Doc. No. 119), recommending that the defendants' Amended Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 91) be granted. The filing deadline for objections passed without any objection from Amos or the defendants.
Standard of Review
When no timely objections are filed to a magistrate judge's R&R, a district court reviews it only for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996). Clear error is a deferential standard — the court will not disturb the magistrate's findings unless they are plainly wrong. The court found no clear error.
Ruling
Judge Blackwell accepted the R&R in full and granted the defendants' Amended Motion for Summary Judgment. All claims against Ryan Kelly and Kurtis Schoonover were dismissed with prejudice, and the entire action was dismissed with prejudice. A judgment was ordered to be entered accordingly.
Scope of this Order
Because this order merely accepts the R&R without independently analyzing the merits, the legal reasoning underlying the summary judgment ruling is found in the magistrate judge's July 15, 2025 R&R (Doc. No. 119), which is not reproduced here.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.