Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 28, 2020

Van Zyverden v. Marques

Judge
Eric Tostrud
Docket
0:19-cv-00948
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

Van Zyverden v. Marques: Judge Tostrud accepted the magistrate judge’s recommendation and denied Van Zyverden’s habeas petition as moot.

Who this affects

Corstiaan Aaron Van Zyverden, whose writ was denied as moot, and R. Marques, the named defendant.

What happened

In Van Zyverden v. Marques, Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a January 8, 2020 report and recommendation about Corstiaan Aaron Van Zyverden’s habeas petition.

No party objected to the recommendation, so the court reviewed it for clear error. The court found no clear error and accepted the recommendation.

Judge Eric C. Tostrud denied Van Zyverden’s habeas petition as moot, meaning the court treated it as no longer presenting a live issue.

The detailed version

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

Case
Van Zyverden v. Marques · No. 0:19-cv-00948
Judge
Eric Tostrud
Date
Jan. 28, 2020

Background

Corstiaan Aaron Van Zyverden filed a writ of habeas corpus against R. Marques. The court received a January 8, 2020 report and recommendation from United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois.

Review

No party objected to the report and recommendation. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the court therefore reviewed it for clear error—a significant mistake apparent from the record. The court found no clear error.

Ruling

Judge Eric C. Tostrud ordered that the report and recommendation be accepted and that Van Zyverden’s writ of habeas corpus be denied as moot. A moot matter is one the court treats as no longer presenting a live dispute. Because the ruling rested on mootness, the court did not decide the underlying habeas question.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.