Hughes v. Rish

In Hughes v. Rish, No. 24-CV-4564 (NEB/LIB), plaintiff Tederian Charles Hughes filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota against five defendants: Kris Rish, Joel Smith, John Swenson, Crystal Hansen, and Chantel Wolak. The nature of the underlying claims is not described in this order.

The defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 10). The matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois, who issued a Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 19) on June 2, 2025, recommending that the motion be granted and the case dismissed.

Neither party filed objections to the Report and Recommendation within the allotted period. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), when no timely objections are filed, a district court reviews a magistrate judge's report and recommendation only for 'clear error.' See Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996). United States District Judge Nancy E. Brasel found no clear error in the Report and Recommendation.

Accordingly, on August 8, 2025, Judge Brasel: (1) accepted the Report and Recommendation; (2) granted the defendants' Motion to Dismiss; and (3) dismissed the case without prejudice. A dismissal without prejudice does not permanently bar the plaintiff from refiling his claims, as opposed to a dismissal with prejudice, which would foreclose refiling.

Note: The underlying substantive basis for the motion to dismiss — i.e., the legal grounds on which dismissal was recommended — is not set forth in this order, which is limited to accepting the magistrate judge's prior recommendation.