Wilson v. State of Minnesota
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:23-cv-03673
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Wilson v. State of Minnesota, Judge Tostrud dismissed the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute and denied two motions as moot.
Edward Wilson’s action was dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. His application to proceed without paying filing fees and his motion to access grievance history were denied as moot. The defendants were the State of Minnesota and the Ramsey County Detention Center, All staff.
What happened
Edward Wilson sued the State of Minnesota and the Ramsey County Detention Center and its staff. The opinion does not describe the underlying allegations or merits of the case.
A magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation on February 22, 2024. Because no party objected, the district court reviewed it for clear error and found none.
Judge Eric C. Tostrud accepted the recommendation and dismissed the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. He also denied Wilson’s application to proceed without paying filing fees and his motion to access grievance history as moot.
The detailed version
- Wilson v. State of Minnesota · No. 0:23-cv-03673
- Eric Tostrud
- Mar. 25, 2024
Background
Edward Wilson brought this action against the State of Minnesota and the Ramsey County Detention Center, All staff. The opinion does not state the claims or underlying facts.
Magistrate Judge Douglas L. Micko issued a Report and Recommendation on February 22, 2024. No party objected. Under the court’s review standard, the district court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error.
Ruling
The court found no clear error and accepted the Report and Recommendation.
The court ordered that:
- The action was dismissed without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute. - Edward Wilson’s application to proceed without paying filing fees was denied as moot. - Wilson’s motion to access grievance history was denied as moot.
The court directed that judgment be entered accordingly.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.