Meranelli v. Minnesota Department of Human Services
Cherrity Honesty-Alexis Meranelli v. Minnesota Department of Human Services, Direct Care and Treatment, Minnesota Sex Offender Program, Jodi Harpstead, Nancy A. Johnston, Tony Klar, Rachel Broadway, Destany Anderson, Jonathan Klingaman, and Jane/John Does, sued in their official and individual capacities
- Laura Provinzino
- 0:25-cv-02292
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 3
In Cherrity Honesty-Alexis Meranelli v. Minnesota Department of Human Services, Judge Provinzino adopted the R&R and granted in part and denied in part the dismissal motion.
Cherrity Honesty-Alexis Meranelli’s federal civil-rights and state-law claims were dismissed in the ways listed in the order. The ruling affects the Minnesota Department of Human Services, the Minnesota Sex Offender Program, the named individual defendants, and the Jane/John Doe defendants.
What happened
Cherrity Honesty-Alexis Meranelli v. Minnesota Department of Human Services involves claims under federal and Minnesota law. Meranelli alleged that the defendants violated her civil rights, violated the Minnesota Human Rights Act, and were negligent under Minnesota law.
The defendants asked the court to dismiss the claims under federal procedural rules governing jurisdiction and whether a complaint states a legally sufficient claim. Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois recommended dismissing the claims but recommended different results about whether the dismissals should bar refiling and about the reasons for dismissal. No party objected, so the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Judge Laura M. Provinzino adopted the recommendation and granted in part and denied in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss. The court dismissed some federal civil-rights claims with prejudice, dismissed other federal claims without prejudice, and dismissed the Minnesota claims without prejudice, as specified in the order.
The detailed version
- Meranelli v. Minnesota Department of Human Services · No. 0:25-cv-02292
- Laura M. Provinzino
- Feb. 12, 2026
Background
Cherrity Honesty-Alexis Meranelli brought claims under federal and Minnesota law against the defendants in their official and individual capacities. The opinion states that she alleged violations of her civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, violations of the Minnesota Human Rights Act, and negligence under Minnesota common law.
The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint under Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Rule 12(b)(1) concerns the court’s jurisdiction, and Rule 12(b)(6) concerns whether a complaint states a legally sufficient claim. The defendants requested dismissal with prejudice.
Report and Recommendation
On December 3, 2025, Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a Report and Recommendation. It recommended granting the motion in part insofar as Meranelli’s claims should be dismissed. It also recommended denying the motion in part regarding whether the dismissals should be with or without prejudice and regarding the bases for dismissal of various claims compared with what the defendants had requested.
No party objected to the Report and Recommendation. The district court therefore reviewed it for clear error and found no error.
Ruling
The court adopted the Report and Recommendation and granted in part and denied in part the defendants’ motion to dismiss.
The court ordered the following:
- Meranelli’s § 1983 claims against the Minnesota Sex Offender Program were dismissed with prejudice. - Meranelli’s § 1983 claims against the Minnesota Department of Human Services were dismissed without prejudice. - Meranelli’s § 1983 claims for monetary and punitive damages against all individual named defendants in their official capacities were dismissed with prejudice. - Meranelli’s § 1983 claims for monetary and punitive damages against all defendants in their individual capacities were dismissed without prejudice. - Meranelli’s § 1983 claims for injunctive and declaratory relief against all individual named defendants in their official or individual capacities were dismissed without prejudice. - Meranelli’s state-law claims were dismissed without prejudice.
The order directed that judgment be entered accordingly. The opinion does not reproduce the Report and Recommendation’s detailed reasoning for each dismissal.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.