Hmong College Prep Academy v. Woodstock Capital, LLC and Clark Reiner
- Paul Magnuson
- 0:21-cv-01721
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate.
In Hmong College Prep Academy v. Woodstock Capital, Judge Magnuson ordered defendants to pay the settlement amount they owed after they failed to comply with a prior settlement agreement.
Parties to settlement agreements in federal court, particularly where one side has failed to pay an agreed settlement amount. Defendants Woodstock Capital, LLC and Clark Reiner are directly bound by this order and must deliver the required payment within five business days.
What happened
In Hmong College Prep Academy v. Woodstock Capital, LLC and Clark Reiner (Case No. 21-1721), Plaintiff Hmong College Prep Academy asked the court to force the defendants to honor a settlement agreement they had already reached. The defendants did not oppose the motion. A U.S. Magistrate Judge reviewed the request and issued a Report and Recommendation advising that the motion should be granted.
Because no party objected to the Magistrate Judge's recommendation, the presiding judge was only required to check it for clear error — a less demanding review standard than if objections had been filed. The court reviewed the recommendation and found no errors of any kind.
Judge Paul A. Magnuson adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation in full on December 3, 2025. The court granted Hmong College Prep Academy's motion and ordered Woodstock Capital, LLC and Clark Reiner to make the required settlement payment within five business days. The court also entered formal judgment in favor of Hmong College Prep Academy for that same payment amount.
The detailed version
- Hmong College Prep Academy v. Woodstock Capital, LLC and Clark Reiner · No. 0:21-cv-01721
- Paul Magnuson
- Dec. 3, 2025
Background
Plaintiff Hmong College Prep Academy brought this civil action against Defendants Woodstock Capital, LLC and Clark Reiner. The parties apparently reached a settlement agreement at some point prior to this order, and that agreement included a payment obligation on the defendants' part under Section 1 of the Settlement Agreement. When the defendants did not fulfill that obligation, the plaintiff filed a Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (Docket No. 90). The defendants did not oppose the motion.
Magistrate Judge Proceedings
United States Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko reviewed the unopposed motion and issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) dated November 6, 2025 (Docket No. 96), recommending that the motion be granted.
Standard of Review
Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and District of Minnesota Local Rule 72.2(b), a district court must conduct a de novo (fresh, independent) review of any portion of a Magistrate Judge's R&R to which a party files specific objections. Where no objections are filed, the district court reviews only for clear error. Because no party objected here, Judge Magnuson applied the clear-error standard, citing Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996).
Ruling
Judge Magnuson found no error — clear or otherwise — in the Magistrate Judge's reasoning. The court:
- Adopted the R&R (Docket No. 96);
- Granted Hmong College Prep Academy's unopposed Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement (Docket No. 90);
- Ordered Defendants Woodstock Capital, LLC and Clark Reiner to specifically perform (i.e., actually carry out) their payment obligation under Section 1 of the Settlement Agreement by delivering the required settlement payment to Hmong College Prep Academy within five business days of the order; and
- Entered judgment for Plaintiff Hmong College Prep Academy in the amount of the Settlement Payment required by Section 1 of the Settlement Agreement.
Notes
The opinion does not disclose the dollar amount of the Settlement Payment, the underlying claims in the litigation, or the reasons the defendants failed to make the payment. The order enforces a pre-existing agreement rather than adjudicating the underlying dispute on its merits.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.