Court, Explained
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Back to docket
Procedural orderFiled Nov. 25, 2025

Mills v. Anoka County Jail

Judge
Eric Tostrud
Docket
0:25-cv-02347
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Mills v. Anoka County Jail, Judge Tostrud dismissed plaintiff Shelley Jane Mills's complaint without prejudice for failing to prosecute her case.

Who this affects

Plaintiff Shelley Jane Mills, whose case has been dismissed without prejudice; she may refile subject to applicable rules and deadlines. Defendants Anoka County Jail, Sheila Larson, and Brad Wise are not required to defend at this time.

What happened

In Mills v. Anoka County Jail, Sheila Larson, and Brad Wise (No. 25-cv-2347), plaintiff Shelley Jane Mills filed a complaint in federal court in Minnesota against Anoka County Jail and two individuals. A Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation on October 28, 2025, recommending that the case be dismissed because Mills failed to prosecute — meaning she did not take the steps required to move her case forward.

No party objected to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation within the time allowed. When no party objects, the reviewing judge checks only for clear error rather than conducting a full independent review. The court found no clear error in the Magistrate Judge's analysis.

Judge Eric C. Tostrud accepted the Report and Recommendation and dismissed Mills's complaint without prejudice for failure to prosecute. A dismissal without prejudice means Mills is not permanently barred from refiling her claims, though any refiling would be subject to applicable rules and deadlines.

The detailed version

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

Case
Mills v. Anoka County Jail · No. 0:25-cv-02347
Judge
Eric Tostrud
Date
Nov. 25, 2025

Background

Plaintiff Shelley Jane Mills filed a complaint against Anoka County Jail, Sheila Larson, and Brad Wise in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or their factual basis.

Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation

Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) on October 28, 2025, recommending dismissal of Mills's complaint for failure to prosecute — that is, Mills failed to take the procedural steps necessary to advance her lawsuit. The opinion does not detail the specific conduct (or inaction) that gave rise to the failure-to-prosecute finding.

Standard of Review

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), when no party files a timely objection to a magistrate judge's R&R, the district court reviews the R&R only for clear error. No party objected here, so Judge Tostrud applied that deferential standard.

Ruling

Finding no clear error in the R&R, Judge Tostrud accepted the Report and Recommendation and dismissed Mills's complaint without prejudice for failure to prosecute. A dismissal without prejudice does not permanently bar the plaintiff from refiling, though any future action would be subject to applicable procedural rules and statutes of limitations. Judgment was ordered to be entered accordingly.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.