Judish v. City of Eden Prairie
Grant Anthony Judish v. City of Eden Prairie, Brett Lindeman, Dan Peterson, Mark Gustad, Rob Johnston, Christopher Wood, and Matthew Sackett
- Laura Provinzino
- 0:25-cv-01302
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 3
In Judish v. City of Eden Prairie, Judge Provinzino granted defendants’ motion to dismiss, ending some claims but allowing Judish’s individual-capacity Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims to proceed.
Grant Anthony Judish’s claims against the Eden Prairie Defendants were limited. Several claims and defendants were dismissed with prejudice, while his individual-capacity Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims against Dan Peterson and Mark Gustad remain.
What happened
Grant Anthony Judish sued the City of Eden Prairie and several Eden Prairie police officials over the alleged mishandling of his personal property during his April 2021 arrest. He asserted claims under federal constitutional provisions and Minnesota law.
The defendants asked the court to dismiss several claims and defendants. The court dismissed with prejudice all claims against the City, Brett Lindeman, Rob Johnston, Christopher Wood, and Matthew Sackett; all official-capacity claims against Mark Gustad and Dan Peterson; Dan Peterson’s Eighth Amendment claim; and all claims based on Minnesota criminal statutes. Judish’s Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims against Peterson and Gustad in their individual capacities remain.
Judge Laura M. Provinzino reviewed Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster’s recommendation for clear error because no party objected, found no error, adopted it in full, and granted the defendants’ motion for partial dismissal.
The detailed version
- Judish v. City of Eden Prairie · No. 0:25-cv-01302
- Laura M. Provinzino
- Feb. 4, 2026
Background
Grant Anthony Judish brought claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Minnesota law concerning the alleged mishandling of his personal property in connection with his April 2021 arrest. He alleged violations of the Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments and asserted claims under various Minnesota criminal statutes.
Judish initially sued the City of Eden Prairie, Eden Prairie Police Department officials, Hennepin County and related institutions and officials, and the Minnesota Board of Peace Officer Standards and Training. After two earlier dismissal orders, only the claims against the City of Eden Prairie and the named Eden Prairie officials remained.
Motion and recommendation
The Eden Prairie Defendants moved to dismiss several claims. They sought dismissal of the Eighth Amendment claim against Dan Peterson; the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims against Peterson and Mark Gustad in their official capacities; all claims against the City, Brett Lindeman, Rob Johnston, Christopher Wood, and Matthew Sackett; and all Minnesota statutory claims against the Eden Prairie Defendants. They did not seek dismissal of Judish’s Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims against Peterson and Gustad in their individual capacities.
Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a Report and Recommendation concluding that the motion should be granted. No party objected. The court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Ruling
Judge Laura M. Provinzino adopted the Report and Recommendation in full and granted the defendants’ Motion for Partial Dismissal of Plaintiff’s Complaint.
The order dismissed with prejudice:
- All claims against the City of Eden Prairie, Brett Lindeman, Rob Johnston, Christopher Wood, and Matthew Sackett; - All claims against Mark Gustad and Dan Peterson in their official capacities; - Dan Peterson’s Eighth Amendment claim; and - All claims arising under Minnesota state criminal statutes against all defendants.
The order states that Judish’s Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment claims against Dan Peterson and Mark Gustad in their individual capacities remain and may proceed. The opinion does not explain the underlying reasoning of the adopted recommendation.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.