Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Sorenson v. Minnesota Department of Human Services

United States District Court, D. Minnesota

December 5, 2014

Eric Michael Sorenson, Plaintiff,
v.
Minnesota Department of Human Services, Minnesota Sex Offender Program, Lucinda Jesson, Nancy Johnston, Jannine Herbert, James Berg, Kevin Moser, Tom Lundquist, Tara Osborne, Angelique Brewer-Ottom, Rob Rose, Jennifer Abson, Al Jennings, Scott Sutton, David Paulson, James Michael Olson, Mary Skalko, Troy Basaraba, Joel Brown, Jeremy Hammond, et al., Defendants.

Eric Michael Sorenson, pro se.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

ANN D. MONTGOMERY, District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

On September 11, 2014, Eric Michael Sorenson ("Sorenson" or "Plaintiff") filed a Motion for Leave to File Report and Recommendation Objections Out of Time and to Vacate Order Adopting R&R and Judgment in Civil Action [Docket No. 161] ("Motion for Leave and to Vacate"). Five days later, on September 16, 2014, Sorenson filed a Motion for Rule 59 and 60(b) Relief [Docket No. 172]. For the reasons set forth below, Sorenson's Motion for Leave and to Vacate is Denied and Sorenson's Motion for Rule 59 and 60(b) Relief is Granted in Part and Denied in Part.

II. BACKGROUND

Sorenson, a patient civilly committed in the Minnesota Sex Offender Program ("MSOP"), initiated the present lawsuit on October 29, 2013. Compl. [Docket No. 1]. A large number of MSOP departments and employees (collectively, the "State Defendants") are named as defendants, along with two civilly committed MSOP patients. Id . On March 21, 2014, Sorenson filed a Supplemental Complaint [Docket No. 70], alleging additional claims and adding additional MSOP employees.

On July 31, 2014, Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois issued an Order and Report and Recommendation [Docket No. 153] ("R&R") addressing the State Defendants' Motion to Dismiss [Docket No. 28], Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Default Judgment [Docket No. 57], Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Default Judgment [Docket No. 80], Plaintiff's Motion to Consider the Defendants' Current Motion to Dismiss Moot or Denied [Docket No. 88], Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint [Docket No. 92], the State Defendants' Partial Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Supplemental Complaint [Docket No. 100], and Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Supplemental Complaint as of Right or Freely [Docket No. 124]. The R&R granted the State Defendants' dismissal Motions, and granted Sorenson's Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint and his Motion to Amend Supplemental Complaint as of Right. The R&R denied Sorenson's other motions.

On August 8, 2014, Sorenson filed a Notice of Partial Voluntary Dismissal [Docket No. 154] pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. This notice effectively dismissed without prejudice every claim and every defendant from this lawsuit with the exception of Count 1 of the Amended Supplemental Complaint as pled against Defendant Angelique Brewer-Ottom.

On August 22, 2014, this Court issued an Order Adopting the R&R [Docket No. 155]. Three days later, on August 25, 2014, Judgment [Docket No. 156] was entered. Sometime thereafter, an error in the August 22, 2014 Order was identified.[1] On September 8, 2014, an Amended Order Adopting the R&R [Docket No. 159] was docketed. The Amended Order struck the Judgment that was previously entered.

Sorenson's September 11, 2014 Motion, Motion for Leave and to Vacate, requests additional time to file objections to Judge Brisbois' R&R and seeks to vacate this Court's Order adopting the R&R and the entry of Judgment. Sorenson's September 16, 2014 Motion, Motion for Rule 59 and 60(b) Relief, alleges a jurisdictional deficiency in this Court's August 22, 2014 Order, and requests the appointment of counsel and an evidentiary hearing.

III. DISCUSSION

A. Motion for Leave and to Vacate

Sorenson requests additional time to submit objections to Judge Brisbois' R&R. In addition, Sorenson requests the objections submitted as Exhibit 1 to this Motion be submitted as proper R&R objections. Because every objection Sorenson raises is directed at claims or defendants that were voluntarily dismissed, the objections are no longer relevant to the claims in this lawsuit. Accordingly, Sorenson's requests are denied as moot.

Sorenson also requests that the entry of Judgment be vacated. This request is also moot because the Judgment was stricken by the Amended ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.