Judish v. City of Eden Prairie
- Laura Provinzino
- 0:25-cv-01302
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Judish v. City of Eden Prairie, Judge Provinzino adopted a magistrate judge's recommendation and permanently dismissed all claims by plaintiff Grant Anthony Judish against Hennepin County.
Plaintiff Grant Anthony Judish, who loses all claims against Hennepin County permanently, and Hennepin County, which is dismissed from the lawsuit. The remaining defendants — the City of Eden Prairie and the six named individual defendants — are not affected by this order.
What happened
In Judish v. City of Eden Prairie, plaintiff Grant Anthony Judish sued the City of Eden Prairie, several individual defendants, and Hennepin County in federal court. Hennepin County moved to have the claims against it thrown out, and Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a detailed recommendation on August 11, 2025 concluding that dismissal was appropriate.
Neither Judish nor any other party filed objections to the magistrate judge's recommendation within the allowed time. When no objections are filed, the district court reviews the recommendation only for clear error — a less demanding standard than a full independent review.
Judge Provinzino found no clear error in the recommendation and adopted it in full on September 17, 2025. As a result, all of Judish's claims against Hennepin County are dismissed with prejudice, meaning those claims cannot be refiled. The case continues against the remaining defendants — the City of Eden Prairie and the named individual defendants.
The detailed version
This case, Judish v. City of Eden Prairie, Case No. 25-cv-1302, is pending before United States District Judge Laura M. Provinzino in the District of Minnesota. Plaintiff Grant Anthony Judish brought suit against the City of Eden Prairie, individual defendants Brett Lindeman, Dan Peterson, Mark Gustad, Rob Johnston, Christopher Wood, and Matthew Sackett, as well as Hennepin County.
Hennepin County filed a motion to dismiss (ECF No. 13), arguing that Judish's claims against it should be thrown out. United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) on August 11, 2025 (ECF No. 30), recommending that the motion be granted and that all claims against Hennepin County be dismissed with prejudice.
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), when no party objects to a magistrate judge's R&R within the prescribed period, the district court reviews the R&R only for clear error. No party objected here. Judge Provinzino applied that standard, found no clear error, and adopted the R&R in full.
The court ordered: (1) the R&R is adopted; (2) Hennepin County's motion to dismiss is granted; and (3) Judish's claims against Hennepin County only (ECF No. 1) are dismissed with prejudice — permanently barring Judish from refiling those specific claims against Hennepin County. The case remains pending against the other named defendants. The order was entered September 17, 2025, and judgment is to be entered accordingly.
Note: The opinion does not describe the underlying facts of Judish's claims or the specific legal grounds on which the magistrate judge recommended dismissal; those details appear in the R&R (ECF No. 30), which is not reproduced here.
Reviewer note from the AI+
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.