Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 25, 2023

Flynn v. Eischen

Judge
Eric Tostrud
Docket
0:22-cv-01265
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Flynn v. Eischen, Judge Tostrud accepted a report, denied Flynn’s petition, and dismissed the case without prejudice.

Who this affects

Scott Phillip Flynn’s petition was denied and his case was dismissed without prejudice. B. Eischen was the respondent.

What happened

Flynn v. Eischen involved a petition filed by Scott Phillip Flynn. Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a report and recommendation on October 26, 2022, and the court extended the deadline for objections.

No party objected to the report and recommendation. The court therefore reviewed it for clear error and found none, without explaining the report’s underlying reasoning in this order.

Judge Eric C. Tostrud accepted the report and recommendation, denied Flynn’s petition, and dismissed the case without prejudice.

The detailed version

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

Case
Flynn v. Eischen · No. 0:22-cv-01265
Judge
Eric Tostrud
Date
Jan. 25, 2023

Background

Scott Phillip Flynn filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus against B. Eischen, identified in the caption as the FPC-Duluth Warden. Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued a Report and Recommendation on October 26, 2022. A request to extend the deadline for responding was granted, and objections were due by December 27, 2022.

Court’s Review

No party objected to the Report and Recommendation. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error. The order states that the court found no clear error, but it does not describe the recommendation’s underlying analysis or the grounds for denying the petition.

Disposition

The court ordered that the Report and Recommendation be accepted, Flynn’s petition be denied, and the case be dismissed without prejudice. Judgment was ordered to be entered accordingly.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.