Dominic Young and Princeton Young v. Davis
Dominic Young and Princeton Young v. Moshe Davis, Michael Wegner, Jeremy Riley, Davis Mueller, David Mathes, and City of Minneapolis
- Paul Magnuson
- 0:25-cv-01693
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
In Young v. Davis, Judge Magnuson adopted a magistrate judge's recommendation and dismissed — without prejudice, meaning it can be refiled — the claims brought by Dominic Young and Princeton Young against defendant Michael Wegner.
Plaintiffs Dominic Young and Princeton Young, whose claims against defendant Michael Wegner have been dismissed without prejudice. The remaining defendants — Moshe Davis, Jeremy Riley, Davis Mueller, David Mathes, and the City of Minneapolis — are not directly affected by this order.
What happened
In Young v. Davis (Civil No. 25-1693), plaintiffs Dominic Young and Princeton Young filed suit against several defendants, including Michael Wegner, Moshe Davis, Jeremy Riley, Davis Mueller, David Mathes, and the City of Minneapolis. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Elsa M. Bullard, who issued a Report and Recommendation on October 2, 2025, recommending that the claims against defendant Michael Wegner be dismissed without prejudice — meaning the plaintiffs would not be permanently barred from bringing those claims again.
The plaintiffs did not file any 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, rather than conducting a full independent review.
Judge Magnuson reviewed the Report and Recommendation, found no error in the Magistrate Judge's reasoning, and issued an order on October 29, 2025, adopting the recommendation and dismissing the claims against Michael Wegner without prejudice. The case continues as to the remaining defendants.
The detailed version
Case: Dominic Young and Princeton Young v. Moshe Davis, Michael Wegner, Jeremy Riley, Davis Mueller, David Mathes, and City of Minneapolis, Civ. No. 25-1693 (PAM/EMB), United States District Court, District of Minnesota. Presiding Judge: Paul A. Magnuson, United States District Court Judge.
Background: Plaintiffs Dominic Young and Princeton Young brought suit against six defendants: Moshe Davis, Michael Wegner, Jeremy Riley, Davis Mueller, David Mathes, and the City of Minneapolis. The opinion does not describe the underlying facts or legal theories at issue. The matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Elsa M. Bullard.
Report and Recommendation: On October 2, 2025, Magistrate Judge Bullard issued a Report and Recommendation (R&R) recommending dismissal of Plaintiffs' claims against defendant Michael Wegner without prejudice. The opinion does not set forth the specific grounds for this recommendation.
Objections: Plaintiffs did not file any objections to the R&R within the time permitted under District of Minnesota Local Rule 72.2(b)(1).
Standard of Review: Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and D. Minn. L.R. 72.2(b), a district court must review de novo (anew and independently) any portion of an R&R to which specific objections are made. Where, as here, no objections are filed, the court reviews the R&R only for clear error. The court cited Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) for this standard.
Ruling: Judge Magnuson found no error — clear or otherwise — in Magistrate Judge Bullard's reasoning, adopted the R&R in full, and dismissed Plaintiffs' claims against Michael Wegner without prejudice. A dismissal without prejudice means Plaintiffs are not permanently barred from reasserting those claims. The order is silent as to the status of claims against the remaining five defendants.
Note: The opinion contains a typographical error ('DIMISSED' rather than 'DISMISSED') in the ordering paragraph, but the legal effect is clear from context.
Reviewer note from the AI+
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.