Holmes v. Newkirk
- Jerry Blackwell
- 0:22-cv-02985
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 3
In Holmes v. Fletcher, Judge Blackwell accepted an earlier recommendation, overruled Holmes’s objections, and dismissed claims with and without prejudice.
Stephan Nicholas Holmes; Bob Fletcher; Ramsey County ADC; and the John Doe defendants. The order dismissed some claims with prejudice and others without prejudice, and denied Holmes’s request for appointed counsel.
What happened
In Stephan Nicholas Holmes v. Bob Fletcher et al., Holmes objected to a recommendation that his case be dismissed and that his request for a lawyer be denied. The court reviewed his objections and found that they repeated arguments already made and did not identify a legal or factual error.
The court overruled Holmes’s objections and accepted the recommendation. It dismissed with prejudice all claims against Ramsey County ADC and Holmes’s Eighteenth Amendment claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against all defendants. It dismissed without prejudice Holmes’s remaining claims against Bob Fletcher and his Americans with Disabilities Act, Rehabilitation Act, and specified official-capacity claims against the John Doe defendants.
Judge Jerry W. Blackwell also accepted the recommendation denying Holmes’s motion to appoint counsel. The order does not explain the underlying reasons for each dismissal beyond accepting the recommendation.
The detailed version
- Holmes v. Newkirk · No. 0:22-cv-02985
- Jerry W. Blackwell
- May 24, 2023
Background
Stephan Nicholas Holmes, who represented himself, objected to Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster’s April 14, 2023 Report and Recommendation. Holmes challenged the recommendations to dismiss his action against Bob Fletcher and to deny his motion to appoint counsel.
Court’s review
The court reviewed the portions of the recommendation to which Holmes objected de novo, meaning independently rather than simply deferring to the magistrate judge. It reviewed the unobjected portions for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake. The court also said that Holmes’s objections were read liberally because he was representing himself.
The court found that Holmes’s objections merely repeated arguments previously presented to Magistrate Judge Foster and did not identify an error of law or fact. After reviewing the remaining portions of the recommendation, the court found no clear error or conflict with the law and accepted the recommendation in its entirety.
Rulings
The court ordered the following:
- Holmes’s objections were overruled. - The Report and Recommendation was accepted. - All claims against Ramsey County ADC were dismissed with prejudice, meaning the order bars refiling those claims. - Holmes’s Eighteenth Amendment claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 were dismissed with prejudice as to all defendants. - Holmes’s remaining claims against Bob Fletcher were dismissed without prejudice, meaning the order did not bar refiling those claims. - Holmes’s Americans with Disabilities Act claims, Rehabilitation Act claims, and official-capacity claims under the Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments under § 1983 against the John Doe defendants were dismissed without prejudice.
By accepting the recommendation in full, the court also adopted the recommendation denying Holmes’s motion to appoint counsel.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.