Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Nov. 23, 2020

Prouty v. Department of Human Services

Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Docket
0:20-cv-00928
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Prouty v. Department of Human Services, Judge Wright dismissed parts of Prouty’s pleading with prejudice and the rest without prejudice.

Who this affects

Darrell Dean Prouty and the people on whose behalf he sought to bring claims. The order dismissed those representative claims with prejudice, dismissed all other aspects of his pleading without prejudice, and denied his fee-waiver application as moot.

What happened

Prouty v. Department of Human Services concerned Darrell Dean Prouty’s pleading filed October 8, 2020. The court reviewed a magistrate judge’s recommendation because no objections were filed.

The court adopted the recommendation. It dismissed with prejudice the part of Prouty’s pleading seeking claims on behalf of anyone other than Prouty, and dismissed all other parts without prejudice. It also denied Prouty’s application to proceed without prepaying fees or costs as moot.

Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright found no clear error in the recommendation and ordered judgment to be entered.

The detailed version

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

Case
Prouty v. Department of Human Services · No. 0:20-cv-00928
Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Date
Nov. 23, 2020

Background

The court considered an October 20, 2020 Report and Recommendation by United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz. No objections were filed, so the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error. The supplied opinion addresses Darrell Dean Prouty’s pleading filed October 8, 2020.

Rulings

The court found no clear error and adopted the Report and Recommendation.

The court dismissed with prejudice the portion of Prouty’s pleading that sought to bring claims on behalf of anyone other than Prouty. “With prejudice” means that portion cannot be pursued again in the same form.

The court dismissed without prejudice all other aspects of Prouty’s pleading. “Without prejudice” means the order did not bar those matters from being brought again, subject to applicable requirements.

The court also denied Prouty’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs as moot. The court ordered judgment to be entered accordingly.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.