Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 6, 2026

Dillard v. Schnell

Full caption

Latrice Atik Dillard v. Paul Schnell, Commissioner of Corrections (Minnesota Department of Corrections) and Nannette Larson, Dept. Commissioner

Judge
Katherine Menendez
Docket
0:26-cv-00057
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Latrice Atik Dillard v. Paul Schnell, Magistrate Judge Micko recommended dismissal without prejudice after Dillard failed to pay the required initial filing fee.

Who this affects

Latrice Atik Dillard's pending action against Paul Schnell and Nannette Larson.

What happened

In Latrice Atik Dillard v. Paul Schnell, the court had ordered Dillard to pay an initial partial filing fee of $18.20 within 21 days.

The deadline passed, and Dillard had not paid the fee or communicated with the court since starting the case. The report therefore recommends dismissing the action without prejudice, meaning the dismissal does not bar refiling.

Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko issued the recommendation under the rule allowing dismissal for failure to prosecute. The report is not a final order, and it says the parties may file written objections within 14 days after being served.

The detailed version

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

Case
Dillard v. Schnell · No. 0:26-cv-00057
Judge
Katherine Menendez
Date
Feb. 6, 2026

Background

On January 8, 2026, the court ordered Latrice Atik Dillard to pay an initial partial filing fee of $18.20 under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b). The order gave her 21 days to pay and warned that failure to do so could lead to a recommendation that the case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute.

Reasoning

The payment deadline passed, but Dillard did not pay the initial partial filing fee. The report also states that she had not communicated with the court about the case since starting it. Based on those circumstances and the earlier warning, the court relied on Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which allows dismissal for failure to prosecute a case.

Recommendation and Notice

Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko recommended that the action be dismissed without prejudice under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute. The report and recommendation is not a final district court order or judgment and cannot be appealed directly to the Eighth Circuit. The notice states that a party may file specific written objections within 14 days after being served with the report and recommendation and may respond to objections within 14 days after being served with them.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.