Jackson v. Grand Canyon University Academic Standards
Jackson v. Grand Canyon University Academic Standards
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Dana D. Jackson, File No. 19-cv-2350 (ECT/SER) Plaintiff, v. ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Grand Canton University Academic Standards, and Christal Abron, Defendants. ________________________________________________________________________ The Court has received the October 25, 2019 Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz. ECF No. 8. No party has objected to that Report and Recommendation, and the Court therefore reviews it for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam).
Finding no clear error, and based upon all of the files, records, and proceedings in the above-captioned matter, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 8] is ACCEPTED; 2. Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and 3. Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees [ECF No. 2] and her Motion for Summons [ECF No. 4] are DENIED AS MOOT.
Dated: November 15, 2019 s/ Eric C. Tostrud Eric C. Tostrud United States District Court
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Dana D. Jackson, File No. 19-cv-2350 (ECT/SER) Plaintiff, v. ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Grand Canton University Academic Standards, and Christal Abron, Defendants. ________________________________________________________________________ The Court has received the October 25, 2019 Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge David T. Schultz. ECF No. 8. No party has objected to that Report and Recommendation, and the Court therefore reviews it for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam).
Finding no clear error, and based upon all of the files, records, and proceedings in the above-captioned matter, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 8] is ACCEPTED; 2. Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and 3. Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees [ECF No. 2] and her Motion for Summons [ECF No. 4] are DENIED AS MOOT.
Dated: November 15, 2019 s/ Eric C. Tostrud Eric C. Tostrud United States District Court
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.