Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 18, 2019

First National Repossessors, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Judge
Susan Nelson
Docket
0:18-cv-02635
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
3
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

First National Repossessors v. Commissioner, Judge Nelson dismissed the complaint without prejudice after plaintiffs failed to pay the required filing fee.

Who this affects

First National Repossessors, Inc. and Don Mashak’s case was dismissed without prejudice because the required filing fee was not paid.

What happened

First National Repossessors, Inc. and Don Mashak sued the Commissioner of Internal Revenue. They asked to proceed without paying the filing fee, but the court denied that request and gave them more time to pay.

The plaintiffs did not pay the required $400 filing fee. They objected to dismissing the case, challenged the rule limiting fee waivers to people rather than companies, and objected to the court’s handling of sealed state-court records.

Judge Susan Richard Nelson overruled the objection, adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation, and dismissed the complaint without prejudice. The dismissal was based on the unpaid filing fee and did not permanently bar the case.

The detailed version

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

Case
First National Repossessors, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue · No. 0:18-cv-02635
Judge
Susan Nelson
Date
Jan. 18, 2019

Background

First National Repossessors, Inc. (FNR) and Don Mashak, appearing without lawyers, filed a complaint and an application to proceed without paying the filing fee. A magistrate judge denied that application because FNR was not eligible for that status. The court gave the plaintiffs 20 days to pay the required $400 filing fee and later extended the deadline to November 19, 2018. The plaintiffs never paid the fee.

The magistrate judge recommended dismissing the complaint without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The plaintiffs filed an objection. They objected to the court’s failure to dismiss FNR earlier, challenged the interpretation of the statute governing fee waivers, and objected to the court’s failure to unseal records from state-court proceedings. The district court reviewed the challenged portions of the recommendation independently.

Ruling

The court rejected the plaintiffs’ arguments. It stated that neither Mashak nor FNR was eligible to proceed without paying the filing fee, and that the court could not disregard the statutory rule that only a natural person may qualify for that status. It also held that Mashak’s request concerning the state-court records was moot because the case was being dismissed.

Judge Susan Richard Nelson overruled the plaintiffs’ objection, adopted Magistrate Judge Steven Rau’s report and recommendation in its entirety, and dismissed the complaint without prejudice. The court ordered that judgment be entered accordingly.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.