Heggs v. Department of Corrections
Heggs v. Department of Corrections
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Terry Heggs, Case No. 20-CV-2302 (KMM/ECW) Plaintiff, v. ORDER Department of Corrections et al., Defendants.
The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright, dated July 22, 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.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 47] is ACCEPTED.
2. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 21] is GRANTED.
3. Plaintiff’s claims for monetary damages against Defendant Minnesota Department of Corrections and the individual Defendants in their official capacities are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
4. Plaintiff’s claims for prospective relief are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
5. The claims against Defendant Sergeant Padelford in his individual capacity are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
6. The claims against Lieutenant Spets, CPD Reed, and Sergeant Nerirer are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and 7. The claims against all other Defendants in their individual capacities are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Let Judgment Be Entered Accordingly.
Date: September 19, 2022 / Katherine M. Menendez United States District Judge
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Terry Heggs, Case No. 20-CV-2302 (KMM/ECW) Plaintiff, v. ORDER Department of Corrections et al., Defendants.
The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Elizabeth Cowan Wright, dated July 22, 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.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 47] is ACCEPTED.
2. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 21] is GRANTED.
3. Plaintiff’s claims for monetary damages against Defendant Minnesota Department of Corrections and the individual Defendants in their official capacities are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
4. Plaintiff’s claims for prospective relief are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
5. The claims against Defendant Sergeant Padelford in his individual capacity are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
6. The claims against Lieutenant Spets, CPD Reed, and Sergeant Nerirer are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and 7. The claims against all other Defendants in their individual capacities are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
Let Judgment Be Entered Accordingly.
Date: September 19, 2022 / Katherine M. Menendez United States District Judge
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.