Sorenson v. State of Minnesota

District Court, D. Minnesota·Decided January 19, 2023·No. 0:21-cv-00671·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Eric M. Sorenson, also known as, Cherrity Honesty-Alexis Meranelli, No. 21-cv-671 (KMM/DJF)

Plaintiff, ORDER v.

State of Minensota, et al.,

Defendants.

The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster, dated November 21, 2022. [Doc. 167]. In the R&R, Judge Foster recommends that the Defendants’ motion for sanctions be granted in part and denied in part such that: (1) Plaintiff Cherrity Meranelli be precluded from offering into evidence any information in support of her claims that Defendants solicited from her and that she failed to produce in discovery; (2) Defendants’ motion to dismiss the case with prejudice be denied; (3) Defendants’ motion to strike the Complaint and Amended Complaints be denied; and Defendants’ request for findings of fact be denied. No objections have been filed to that R&R in the time period permitted by either Ms. Meranelli or the Defendants. 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 the Court finds no error.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation [Doc. 167] is ACCEPTED; 2. Defendants’ motion for discovery sanctions [Doc. 160] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: a. Plaintiff is precluded from offering into evidence any information in support

of her claims that Defendants solicited from her and that she failed to produce in discovery; b. Defendants’ request for dismissal of the case with prejudice is DENIED; c. Defendants’ request to strike Plaintiff’s Complaint and Amended Complaints is DENIED; and

d. Defendants’ request for findings of fact is DENIED.

Date: January 19, 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

Sorenson v. State of Minnesota, (mnd 2023).

Sorenson v. State of Minnesota (Sorenson v. State of Minnesota) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related