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

Goldmann v. Sherburne County Sheriffs Department

Judge
Katherine Menendez
Docket
0:21-cv-02530
Court
U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureFee PetitionMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Goldmann v. County of Sherburne, Judge Menendez accepted the recommendation, denied fees and costs, and denied the dismissal motion without prejudice.

Who this affects

The defendants’ requests for fees and costs and dismissal were denied; the motion to dismiss was denied without prejudice. The plaintiffs were not required to pay the requested fees and costs under this order.

What happened

Goldmann v. County of Sherburne concerned defendants’ motions for fees and costs and to dismiss. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.

No party objected to Magistrate Judge Dulce Foster’s recommendation. Judge Menendez therefore reviewed it for clear error and found none.

Judge Katherine M. Menendez accepted the recommendation, denied defendants’ motion for fees and costs, and denied defendants’ motion to dismiss without prejudice.

The detailed version

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

Case
Goldmann v. Sherburne County Sheriffs Department · No. 0:21-cv-02530
Judge
Katherine Menendez
Date
Apr. 6, 2023

Background

The court considered Magistrate Judge Dulce Foster’s February 10, 2023, report and recommendation. The report addressed defendants’ motion for fees and costs and motion to dismiss, both identified as ECF No. 82. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or the arguments supporting those motions.

Review of the Recommendation

No party filed objections within the permitted period. Because there were no objections, the court reviewed the report and recommendation for clear error rather than conducting a new review of the disputed issues. Judge Menendez stated that the review of the report and the case record showed no error, clear or otherwise.

Ruling

Judge Katherine M. Menendez accepted the report and recommendation. The court denied defendants’ motion for fees and costs. The court also denied defendants’ motion to dismiss without prejudice, meaning the order did not bar a later filing of that motion based solely on this disposition.

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.