Judish v. City of Eden Prairie
- Laura Provinzino
- 0:25-cv-01302
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Judish v. City of Eden Prairie, Judge Provinzino dismissed all claims against Hennepin County with prejudice after finding no clear error in the magistrate judge's recommendation.
Grant Anthony Judish, whose claims against Hennepin County are permanently dismissed; Hennepin County, which is dismissed from the lawsuit. The remaining defendants — the City of Eden Prairie and six named individuals — are not affected by this order.
What happened
In Judish v. City of Eden Prairie (Case No. 25-cv-1302), plaintiff Grant Anthony Judish sued the City of Eden Prairie, several individual defendants, and Hennepin County. Hennepin County filed a motion to dismiss all claims against it, and United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a Report and Recommendation on August 11, 2025, concluding that the motion should be granted and Judish's claims against Hennepin County should be dismissed with prejudice — meaning those claims cannot be refiled.
No party objected to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation within the allowed time. When no objections are filed, the district court reviews the recommendation only for clear error — a more limited review than if objections had been raised.
Judge Laura M. Provinzino found no clear error in the Report and Recommendation and adopted it in full on September 17, 2025. As a result, Hennepin County's motion to dismiss was granted and all of Judish's claims against Hennepin County were dismissed with prejudice. The case continues against the remaining defendants.
The detailed version
- Judish v. City of Eden Prairie · No. 0:25-cv-01302
- Laura M. Provinzino
- Sept. 17, 2025
Background
Plaintiff Grant Anthony Judish filed suit against the City of Eden Prairie, six individual defendants (Brett Lindeman, Dan Peterson, Mark Gustad, Rob Johnston, Christopher Wood, and Matthew Sackett), and Hennepin County. The opinion does not describe the underlying facts or claims in detail, so the nature of the dispute cannot be summarized here beyond what the order states.
Procedural History
Hennepin County filed a motion to dismiss (ECF No. 13), asking the court to throw out all claims against it. The matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster, who issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) on August 11, 2025 (ECF No. 30). The R&R recommended that the motion to dismiss be granted and that all of Judish's claims against Hennepin County be dismissed with prejudice — meaning the claims cannot be brought again in federal court.
Neither Judish nor any defendant objected to the R&R within the applicable period. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and Eighth Circuit precedent (Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793 (8th Cir. 1996)), when no objections are filed, the district court reviews the magistrate judge's recommendation only for 'clear error' — a deferential standard that asks whether the recommendation was obviously wrong, rather than conducting a full independent analysis.
Ruling
Judge Provinzino reviewed the R&R under the clear-error standard and found no clear error. She adopted the R&R in full, granted Hennepin County's motion to dismiss, and ordered that all of Judish's claims against Hennepin County are dismissed with prejudice. The order directs that judgment be entered accordingly.
The order does not address the claims against the remaining defendants — the City of Eden Prairie and the six individual defendants — so those claims remain pending.
What the Opinion Does Not Resolve
The opinion does not describe the legal theories Judish asserted, the factual basis of his claims, or the reasons the Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal. Those details appear in the underlying R&R (ECF No. 30), which is not reproduced here.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.