American Family Mutual Insurance Company v. Hantho Farms LLC
- Jerry Blackwell
- 0:23-cv-03131
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 3
In American Family v. Hantho Farms, Judge Blackwell accepted the magistrate judge’s recommendation and dismissed the action without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
American Family Mutual Insurance Company and all defendants named in the action, including Hantho Farms LLC, Hantho Farms Landscaping LLC, the individual defendants, homeowners associations, and other entities listed in the caption.
What happened
American Family Mutual Insurance Company sued Hantho Farms LLC, doing business as Hantho Outdoor Services, and numerous other defendants. The opinion concerns the court’s review of a magistrate judge’s recommendation in that action.
United States Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko issued a Report and Recommendation on October 31, 2023. No party filed a timely objection, so the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Judge Jerry W. Blackwell accepted the recommendation and dismissed the action without prejudice because the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3).
The detailed version
- American Family Mutual Insurance Company v. Hantho Farms LLC · No. 0:23-cv-03131
- Jerry W. Blackwell
- Nov. 27, 2023
Background
American Family Mutual Insurance Company brought this action against Hantho Farms LLC, doing business as Hantho Outdoor Services; Hantho Farms Landscaping LLC; numerous individuals; several homeowners associations; and other entities identified in the caption.
Report and Recommendation
United States Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko issued a Report and Recommendation on October 31, 2023. The opinion states that no objections were filed within the permitted time. When no timely objection is made, the district court reviews the recommendation for clear error. Judge Blackwell reviewed the recommendation and found no clear error.
Ruling
Judge Blackwell accepted the October 31, 2023 Report and Recommendation. The court dismissed the action without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3), and directed that judgment be entered accordingly. The opinion does not state the underlying basis for the lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.