Hogquist v. State of Minnesota, U.S., The
- Wilhelmina Wright
- 0:19-cv-02472
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Hogquist v. State of Minnesota, Judge Wright adopted the recommendation, dismissed Hogquist’s complaint without prejudice, and denied her fee-waiver application as moot.
Michelle Lyn Hogquist, whose complaint was dismissed without prejudice and whose application to proceed without paying the filing fee was denied as moot; the defendants were affected by the dismissal of the complaint.
What happened
Michelle Lyn Hogquist sued the State of Minnesota, the United States, and others. A magistrate judge issued a report recommending how the case should be handled, but Hogquist did not file objections on time.
Because there were no timely objections, the court reviewed the recommendation only for obvious error in the record. The opinion says the court found no such error, but it does not explain the recommendation’s underlying reason for dismissing the complaint.
Judge Wright adopted the report, dismissed Hogquist’s complaint without prejudice, and denied her application to proceed without paying filing fees as moot. The dismissal without prejudice means the order did not bar a later filing on that basis.
The detailed version
- Hogquist v. State of Minnesota, U.S., The · No. 0:19-cv-02472
- Wilhelmina Wright
- May 4, 2020
Background
The matter came before the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota on a January 29, 2020 report and recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Katherine M. Menendez. The report and recommendation is identified as docket entry 3. The opinion does not reproduce the report’s reasoning or describe the claims in Hogquist’s complaint.
The court noted that the Clerk of Court mailed the report and recommendation to Hogquist’s last known address, but the United States Postal Service returned it as undeliverable. The Clerk also tried to reach her by telephone, but the available number was disconnected. The court stated that a litigant is responsible for providing updated contact information and declined to delay its decision while waiting for Hogquist to update that information.
Review of the Report and Recommendation
Hogquist did not file timely objections. When no timely objections are filed, the court reviews a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake on the face of the record. After reviewing the report and the case materials, the court found no clear error.
Disposition
The court adopted the January 29, 2020 report and recommendation. It dismissed Michelle Lyn Hogquist’s complaint without prejudice. It also denied Hogquist’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, meaning to proceed without paying the filing fee, as moot. The court ordered that judgment be entered accordingly. The opinion does not state the specific basis for dismissing the complaint beyond adopting the report and recommendation.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.