Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 20, 2022

Aery v. Beitel

Judge
Katherine Menendez
Docket
0:22-cv-00114
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Preliminary InjunctionCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Aery v. Beitel, Judge Menendez denied two emergency injunction requests after finding no clear error in the magistrate judge’s recommendation.

Who this affects

The order directly affects James Paul Aery’s two requests for emergency injunctive relief. The opinion does not state additional effects on the defendants.

What happened

In Aery v. Beitel, plaintiff James Paul Aery asked the court for two forms of emergency injunctive relief, including a request under Rule 65.

The magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation on August 5, 2022. No party filed objections, so the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error. The opinion excerpt does not describe the underlying dispute or the recommendation’s reasoning.

Judge Katherine M. Menendez found no error in the recommendation and denied both of Aery’s emergency-injunction motions.

The detailed version

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

Case
Aery v. Beitel · No. 0:22-cv-00114
Judge
Katherine Menendez
Date
Oct. 20, 2022

Background

Plaintiff James Paul Aery filed two requests for emergency relief: an “Emergency Injunction” and an “Emergency Injunction/Restraining Order Rule 65.” The opinion excerpt does not provide the facts underlying those requests.

Review of the Recommendation

United States Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung issued a report and recommendation dated August 5, 2022. No objections were filed within the permitted period. Because there were no objections, the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error rather than conducting a fresh review of disputed issues.

Ruling

After reviewing the report and recommendation and the case record, Judge Katherine M. Menendez concluded that the magistrate judge committed no error, clear or otherwise. The court ordered that Aery’s “Emergency Injunction” motion, ECF No. 16, was DENIED, and that his “Emergency Injunction/Restraining Order Rule 65” motion, ECF No. 21, was DENIED.

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.