Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
D. Minn.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 6, 2023

Gregg v. Basile

Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Docket
0:21-cv-02767
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Gregg v. Basile, Judge Wright adopted the recommendation, granted Basile’s motion to dismiss, and dismissed the case with prejudice because res judicata barred it.

Who this affects

James A. Gregg’s case against Daniel Basile was dismissed with prejudice, and Basile’s motion to dismiss was granted.

What happened

In Gregg v. Basile, James A. Gregg sued Daniel Basile. A magistrate judge recommended dismissing the case, and neither side objected to that recommendation.

The court found no clear error in the recommendation. It explained that the allegations at the center of Gregg’s lawsuit had already been dismissed with prejudice in an earlier related case, so the legal rule against relitigating claims already decided—called res judicata—barred this lawsuit.

Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright adopted the recommendation, granted Daniel Basile’s motion to dismiss, and dismissed the case with prejudice. The court directed that judgment be entered.

The detailed version

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

Case
Gregg v. Basile · No. 0:21-cv-02767
Judge
Wilhelmina Wright
Date
Feb. 6, 2023

Background

James A. Gregg brought this case against Daniel Basile. A magistrate judge issued a January 11, 2023 Report and Recommendation recommending dismissal. No objections were filed.

Court’s Analysis

Because there were no objections, the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning it checked whether the recommendation contained an obvious mistake. The court found no clear error.

The court separately clarified the effect of the dismissal. It stated that the allegations forming the core of Gregg’s pleading had already been dismissed with prejudice in an earlier related case. The court concluded that res judicata—the rule generally barring a party from relitigating claims already resolved by a prior judgment—barred this litigation. Because claims barred by res judicata cannot be litigated again, the court determined that dismissal should be with prejudice.

Disposition

The court adopted the January 11, 2023 Report and Recommendation, granted Daniel Basile’s motion to dismiss, and dismissed the matter with prejudice. It directed that judgment be entered.

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.