Gorski v. Matevousian
- Katherine Menendez
- 0:22-cv-02209
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
Gorski v. Matevousian: Judge Menendez dismissed the action without prejudice because Gorski failed to prosecute it.
Krissy Ann Gorski’s action was dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The order does not describe the underlying claims.
What happened
Krissy Ann Gorski’s case against Andrew Matevousian and others came before the District of Minnesota after a magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation.
No one objected to that report, and the court said Gorski had not communicated with it for several months. The court reviewed the report for clear error and found none.
Judge Katherine M. Menendez dismissed the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute and ordered judgment entered.
The detailed version
- Gorski v. Matevousian · No. 0:22-cv-02209
- Katherine Menendez
- Jan. 18, 2023
Background
The court considered a report and recommendation dated November 14, 2022, prepared by United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
Court’s Review
No objections to the report and recommendation were filed within the permitted time. The court also noted that Krissy Ann Gorski had not communicated with the court for several months. Because no objections were filed, the court reviewed the report for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake. It found no error, clear or otherwise.
Disposition
The court dismissed the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward. The court also ordered that judgment be entered. “Without prejudice” means the dismissal does not itself bar refiling the action.
Classification
This is a procedural order because the court dismissed the action for failure to prosecute without deciding the underlying legal claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.