Traylor v. Stenseth
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:24-cv-00470
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 1
In Traylor v. Stenseth, Judge Tostrud accepted the recommendation, dismissed the action without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction, and ordered no certificate of appealability shall issue.
Raymond Joseph Traylor, Sr.’s action against Lisa Stenseth was dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction, and no certificate of appealability shall issue.
What happened
In Traylor v. Stenseth, Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz issued a report and recommendation on February 28, 2024. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims or explain why jurisdiction was lacking.
No party objected to the report and recommendation. The district court therefore reviewed it for clear error and found none.
Judge Eric C. Tostrud accepted the report and recommendation, dismissed the action without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction, and ordered that no certificate of appealability shall issue.
The detailed version
- Traylor v. Stenseth · No. 0:24-cv-00470
- Eric Tostrud
- Mar. 27, 2024
Background
Raymond Joseph Traylor, Sr. brought this action against Lisa Stenseth, identified in the caption as Warden of MCF Rush City Minnesota. The opinion does not describe the claims or the basis for the action.
Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz issued a Report and Recommendation on February 28, 2024. No party objected to it.
Court’s review and ruling
Because there were no objections, the court reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake. The court found no clear error.
Judge Eric C. Tostrud ordered that the Report and Recommendation be accepted. He also ordered that the action be dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction. A dismissal without prejudice does not itself bar refiling, although the opinion does not discuss whether refiling would be possible or what requirements would apply. The court further ordered that no certificate of appealability shall issue.
The opinion does not address the merits of the underlying claims.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.