Bishop v. Mesojedec
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:19-cv-00794
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 1
In Bishop v. Mesojedec, Judge Tostrud dismissed the complaint without prejudice for failure to prosecute after accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation.
Merel Evans Bishop’s complaint was dismissed without prejudice. The order also resolved the case as to the named defendants, but it did not decide the underlying claims.
What happened
Bishop v. Mesojedec involved a complaint against Chad Mesojedec and other named defendants, including members of the Spiritual Practices Advisory Committee. The opinion does not describe the complaint’s underlying claims.
A magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation on June 13, 2019. No party objected, so the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error.
Judge Tostrud found no clear error, accepted the report and recommendation, and dismissed the complaint without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
The detailed version
- Bishop v. Mesojedec · No. 0:19-cv-00794
- Eric Tostrud
- July 9, 2019
Background
Merel Evans Bishop filed a complaint against Chad Mesojedec, Karen Dalluge, Jessica Geil, Sandra L. Bryant, Nicole Smith, Jordan Goodman, Ryan Hulke, Stacey Sonnek, and all members of the Spiritual Practices Advisory Committee, in their individual and official capacities. The opinion does not describe the complaint’s underlying claims.
United States Magistrate Judge Katherine M. Menendez issued a report and recommendation on June 13, 2019. No party objected to it.
Court’s Review
Because there were no objections, the court reviewed the report and recommendation for clear error under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b). The court found no clear error based on the case records and proceedings.
Ruling
Judge Eric C. Tostrud accepted the report and recommendation and dismissed the complaint without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). A dismissal without prejudice does not bar refiling the complaint, although the opinion does not address whether any later filing would be allowed or successful.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.