Mehaffy v. Thomas

D. Minnesota

Mehaffy v. Thomas

DecidedAugust 18, 2023

Docket0:23-cv-01182

StatusUnknown

This text of Mehaffy v. Thomas (Mehaffy v. Thomas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Mehaffy v. Thomas, (mnd 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Ryan Daniel Mehaffy, Case No. 23-CV-1182 (KMM/DJF) Plaintiff,

v. ORDER

Warden T. Thomas, Defendant.

The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster, dated June 15, 2022. No objections have been filed to that R&R in the time period permitted. The Court reviews de novo any portion of the R&R to which specific objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Minn. LR 72.2(b). In the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. Nur v. Olmsted County, 563 F. Supp. 3d 946, 949 (D. Minn. 2021) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) and Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam)). Based on the Court’s careful review of the R&R and the record in this case, the Magistrate Judge committed no error, clear or otherwise, in recommending that the petition be denied as moot because Mr. Mehaffy has been released. However, finding that a case is moot is a determination regarding subject-matter jurisdiction. Biron v. Carvajal, No. 19-cv-2938-SRN-LIB, 2020 WL 5812970, at *7 (D. Minn. Sept. 30, 2020) (citing Charleston Hous. Auth. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 419 F.3d 729, 739 (8th Cir. 2005)). As a result, the Court concludes

that it is more proper to dismiss this action without prejudice. “A district court is generally barred from dismissing a case with prejudice if it concludes subject matter jurisdiction is absent.” Cnty. of Mille Lacs v. Benjamin, 361 F.3d 460, 464–65 (8th Cir. 2004). Therefore, the Court accepts the R&R with that modification.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. Mr. Mehaffy’s Petition [Dkt. No. 1] and Motion for Expedited Ruling [Dkt. No. 9] are DENIED as moot. 2. This matter is DISMISSED without prejudice.

Let Judgment Be Entered Accordingly. Date: August 18, 2023 s/ Katherine M. Menendez Katherine M. Menendez United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Ryan Daniel Mehaffy, Case No. 23-CV-1182 (KMM/DJF) Plaintiff,

v. ORDER

Warden T. Thomas, Defendant.

The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster, dated June 15, 2022. No objections have been filed to that R&R in the time period permitted. The Court reviews de novo any portion of the R&R to which specific objections are made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Minn. LR 72.2(b). In the absence of objections, the Court reviews the R&R for clear error. Nur v. Olmsted County, 563 F. Supp. 3d 946, 949 (D. Minn. 2021) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) and Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam)). Based on the Court’s careful review of the R&R and the record in this case, the Magistrate Judge committed no error, clear or otherwise, in recommending that the petition be denied as moot because Mr. Mehaffy has been released. However, finding that a case is moot is a determination regarding subject-matter jurisdiction. Biron v. Carvajal, No. 19-cv-2938-SRN-LIB, 2020 WL 5812970, at *7 (D. Minn. Sept. 30, 2020) (citing Charleston Hous. Auth. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 419 F.3d 729, 739 (8th Cir. 2005)). As a result, the Court concludes

that it is more proper to dismiss this action without prejudice. “A district court is generally barred from dismissing a case with prejudice if it concludes subject matter jurisdiction is absent.” Cnty. of Mille Lacs v. Benjamin, 361 F.3d 460, 464–65 (8th Cir. 2004). Therefore, the Court accepts the R&R with that modification.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. Mr. Mehaffy’s Petition [Dkt. No. 1] and Motion for Expedited Ruling [Dkt. No. 9] are DENIED as moot. 2. This matter is DISMISSED without prejudice.

Let Judgment Be Entered Accordingly. Date: August 18, 2023 s/ Katherine M. Menendez Katherine M. Menendez United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Mehaffy v. Thomas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mehaffy-v-thomas-mnd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack