Smith v. John or Jane Doe
- Patrick Schiltz
- 0:23-cv-01849
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
Smith v. John or Jane Doe was dismissed without prejudice after Judge Schiltz adopted a magistrate judge’s unobjected-to recommendation.
Jamal Lindsey Smith and the ten named John or Jane Doe defendants; Smith’s complaint was dismissed without prejudice.
What happened
In Smith v. John or Jane Doe, the district court reviewed a magistrate judge’s recommendation concerning Jamal Lindsey Smith’s complaint against ten defendants identified as John or Jane Doe.
No party objected to the recommendation. The district court therefore reviewed it for clear error and found none.
Judge Patrick J. Schiltz adopted the recommendation and ordered that Smith’s complaint be dismissed without prejudice. The opinion does not state why the complaint was dismissed.
The detailed version
- Smith v. John or Jane Doe · No. 0:23-cv-01849
- Patrick Schiltz
- Aug. 29, 2023
Background
Jamal Lindsey Smith sued ten defendants identified in the caption as John or Jane Doe defendants and described as executive owners of various news and media companies. The court considered a Report and Recommendation dated July 26, 2023, prepared by United States Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko.
Court’s Review
No objections to the Report and Recommendation were filed. Under the review standard cited by the court, the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error. After reviewing the recommendation and the case materials, the court found no clear error.
Ruling
The court adopted the July 26, 2023 Report and Recommendation. It dismissed Smith’s complaint without prejudice, meaning the dismissal did not bar refiling based solely on that dismissal. The opinion does not explain the reason for the dismissal or identify the claims addressed.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.