Patton v. KidsPeace Corporation
Javier Patton v. KidsPeace Corporation, KidsPeace Mesabi Academy, Inc., Devin, Brandon, Amanda, and Trinidad
- Eric Tostrud
- 0:26-cv-00497
- U.S. District Court · District of Minnesota
- 2
Counsel of record per CourtListener. Firm names are approximate.
In Patton v. KidsPeace Corporation, Judge Tostrud dismissed two portions of the complaint without prejudice: claims against 'Brandon' as time-barred and a request for unspecified constitutional violations for failure to state a claim.
Plaintiffs who file civil rights or constitutional claims and may face timeliness issues or must be specific about which constitutional violations they allege; litigants should be aware that vague requests for courts to identify unspecified constitutional claims are subject to dismissal.
What happened
In Patton v. KidsPeace Corporation et al., plaintiff Javier Patton filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota against KidsPeace Corporation, KidsPeace Mesabi Academy, Inc., and several individuals named Devin, Brandon, Amanda, and Trinidad. Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty issued an Order and Report and Recommendation on May 28, 2026, recommending that parts of the complaint be dismissed. No party objected to that recommendation.
The two disputed portions of the complaint concern: (1) claims against defendant 'Brandon,' which the Magistrate Judge found were time-barred, meaning they were filed too late under the applicable deadline; and (2) a request that the court identify unspecified 'other' constitutional violations, which the Magistrate Judge found failed to adequately state a legal claim.
Judge Eric C. Tostrud reviewed the Report and Recommendation for clear error — the standard that applies when no party objects — found none, and accepted it. The claims against 'Brandon' were dismissed without prejudice (meaning Patton is not necessarily barred from attempting to refile, though the time-bar finding may limit that option), and the request for unspecified constitutional violations was also dismissed without prejudice. The remaining claims in the complaint against the other defendants were not addressed in this order.
The detailed version
- Patton v. KidsPeace Corporation · No. 0:26-cv-00497
- Eric Tostrud
- June 25, 2026
Background
Plaintiff Javier Patton filed a complaint against KidsPeace Corporation, KidsPeace Mesabi Academy, Inc., and individual defendants identified as Devin, Brandon, Amanda, and Trinidad. The nature of the underlying claims is not described in this order beyond references to constitutional violations. The case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.
Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation
Magistrate Judge John F. Docherty issued an Order and Report and Recommendation (R&R) on May 28, 2026 (ECF No. 13). The R&R recommended two dismissals:
1. Claims against 'Brandon' — time-barred: The R&R found that Patton's claims against the defendant identified only as 'Brandon' were filed outside the applicable time limit (referred to legally as a statute of limitations). The R&R recommended dismissal of those claims without prejudice on that basis.
2. Request for unspecified constitutional violations — failure to state a claim: The R&R also found that the portion of the complaint asking the court to identify 'other' unspecified constitutional violations did not adequately describe a legal claim. Under federal pleading standards, a complaint must provide sufficient factual allegations to support each claim; a general, open-ended request for the court to find unspecified violations does not satisfy that requirement. The R&R recommended dismissal of that portion without prejudice as well.
Standard of Review
Because no party objected to the R&R within the time allowed, the district court reviewed it under the 'clear error' standard — a deferential standard requiring the court to accept the R&R unless it contains an obvious mistake. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996).
Rulings
Judge Tostrud found no clear error and accepted the R&R in full. The court ordered:
- The claims against defendant 'Brandon' are dismissed without prejudice as time-barred. - The request for 'other' unspecified constitutional violations is dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim.
'Dismissed without prejudice' means the court has not entered a final judgment on the merits of those claims in a way that automatically bars refiling; however, the time-bar finding on the Brandon claims may practically limit Patton's ability to refile those claims.
What Remains
This order addresses only two portions of the complaint. The order does not rule on or dismiss claims against the other defendants — KidsPeace Corporation, KidsPeace Mesabi Academy, Inc., Devin, Amanda, or Trinidad. The rest of the case continues.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.