Braun v. State of Minnesota
Trial Court Opinion
UNITDEISDT SRTIACTT EOSF D MISINTRNIECSTO CTOAU RT
Nathan Christopher Braun, File No. 22-cv-528 (ECT/DJF) Plaintiff, v. ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION State of Minnesota, County of Washington, City of Bayport, Minnesota Department of Corrections, Guy Bosch, Victor Wanchena, CPD Huppert, L. McCoy, and MCF-STW, Defendants. ________________________________________________________________________ Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a Report and Recommendation on December 27, 2022. ECF No. 33. No party has objected to that Report and Recommendation, and it is therefore reviewed 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. 33] is ACCEPTED; 2. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 24] is GRANTED IN PART, and Plaintiff’s claims for declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as Plaintiff’s individual capacity claims brought against the remaining Defendants Wanchena, Huppert, and McCoy, are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and 3. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 24] is DENIED IN PART as to Plaintiff’s official capacity claims for compensatory and punitive damages.
Dated: January 25, 2023 s/ Eric C. Tostrud Eric C. Tostrud United States District Court
Trial Court Opinion
UNITDEISDT SRTIACTT EOSF D MISINTRNIECSTO CTOAU RT
Nathan Christopher Braun, File No. 22-cv-528 (ECT/DJF) Plaintiff, v. ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION State of Minnesota, County of Washington, City of Bayport, Minnesota Department of Corrections, Guy Bosch, Victor Wanchena, CPD Huppert, L. McCoy, and MCF-STW, Defendants. ________________________________________________________________________ Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a Report and Recommendation on December 27, 2022. ECF No. 33. No party has objected to that Report and Recommendation, and it is therefore reviewed 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. 33] is ACCEPTED; 2. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 24] is GRANTED IN PART, and Plaintiff’s claims for declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as Plaintiff’s individual capacity claims brought against the remaining Defendants Wanchena, Huppert, and McCoy, are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and 3. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 24] is DENIED IN PART as to Plaintiff’s official capacity claims for compensatory and punitive damages.
Dated: January 25, 2023 s/ Eric C. Tostrud Eric C. Tostrud United States District Court
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.