Henny v. O'Connor
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:22-cv-02121
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Henny v. O'Connor, Judge Tostrud accepted the recommendation, dismissed federal claims with prejudice, dismissed state claims without prejudice, and denied fee-free filing.
Kimberly Ann Henny’s federal-law claims, state-law claims, and application to proceed without paying court fees were affected; the order also dismissed the matter against the listed defendants.
What happened
In Henny v. O'Connor, the court reviewed a magistrate judge’s recommendation after no party objected to it. The court found no clear error.
The court dismissed Kimberly Ann Henny’s federal-law claims with prejudice under a prisoner-claim screening statute. It dismissed her state-law claims without prejudice because the federal court lacked authority to hear them.
Judge Tostrud also denied Henny’s application to proceed without paying court fees and ordered judgment to be entered.
The detailed version
- Henny v. O'Connor · No. 0:22-cv-02121
- Eric Tostrud
- Nov. 29, 2022
Background
Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty issued a Report and Recommendation on November 3, 2022. No party objected. Under the applicable rule, the district court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the recommendation.
Ruling
Judge Eric C. Tostrud found no clear error and accepted the Report and Recommendation.
The court dismissed Kimberly Ann Henny’s claims arising under federal law with prejudice under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b). It dismissed Henny’s state-law claims without prejudice for lack of federal subject-matter jurisdiction, meaning the federal court lacked legal authority to hear those claims. The court also denied Henny’s application to proceed without paying court fees. The order directed that judgment be entered.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.