Karsjens et al v. Minnesota Department of Human Services et al

Filing 763

ORDER. 1. Defendants' objections (Doc. No. 730 ) to Magistrate Judge Jeffrey J. Keyes's December 15, 2014 Orders are OVERRULED. 2. Magistrate Judge Jeffrey J. Keyes's December 15, 2014 Text Only Order (Doc. No. 706 ) and Minute Entry (Doc. No. 705 ) are AFFIRMED. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Donovan W. Frank on 1/13/2015. (BJS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
Kevin Scott Karsjens, David Leroy Gamble,
Jr., Kevin John DeVillion, Peter Gerard
Lonergan, James Matthew Noyer, Sr.,
James John Rud, James Allen Barber,
Craig Allen Bolte, Dennis Richard Steiner,
Kaine Joseph Braun, Christopher John
Thuringer, Kenny S. Daywitt, Bradley Wayne
Foster, Brian K. Hausfeld, and all others
similarly situated,

Civil No. 11-3659 (DWF/JJK)

Plaintiffs,
v.

ORDER

Lucinda Jesson, Dennis Benson, Kevin
Moser, Tom Lundquist, Nancy Johnston,
Jannine Hébert, and Ann Zimmerman,
in their official capacities,
Defendants.

This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ objections (Doc. No. 730) to Part II of
Magistrate Judge Jeffrey J. Keyes’s December 15, 2014 Text Only Order (Doc. No. 706)
and accompanying Minute Entry (Doc. No. 705) denying Defendants’ Motion Seeking
Relief from Spoliation. Plaintiffs filed a response to Defendants’ objections on January 6,
2015. (Doc. No. 738.)
The Court must modify or set aside any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s order found
to be clearly erroneous or contrary to law. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A); Fed. R. Civ. P.
72(a); D.Minn. LR 72.2(a). This is an “extremely deferential standard.” Reko v. Creative
Promotions, Inc., 70 F. Supp. 2d 1005, 1007 (D. Minn. 1999). “A finding is ‘clearly
erroneous’ when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire

evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.”
Chakales v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 79 F.3d 726, 728 (8th Cir. 1996) (quoting
United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395 (1948)).
Defendants argue that the Magistrate Judge improperly denied their motion because
the Magistrate Judge erroneously based his decision on a requirement of bad faith when he
found that Mr. Braun had not destroyed documents with an intent to suppress the truth. (See
Doc. No. 730 at 5-6.) Plaintiffs, on the other hand, argue that the Magistrate Judge properly
denied Defendants’ motion because “Defendants failed to satisfy any of the elements
required for a spoliation claim” and “the relief sought – an explanation of the litigation hold
information – has already been provided to Defendants.” (See Doc. No. 738 at 4, 9.)
The Court concludes that Defendants have failed to demonstrate that the Magistrate
Judge’s Orders are either clearly erroneous or contrary to law. Therefore, the Court
overrules Defendants’ objections and affirms Magistrate Judge Keyes’s December 15, 2014
Orders in all respects.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1.

Defendants’ objections (Doc. No. [730]) to Magistrate Judge Jeffrey J.

Keyes’s December 15, 2014 Orders are OVERRULED.
2.

Magistrate Judge Jeffrey J. Keyes’s December 15, 2014 Text Only Order

(Doc. No. [706]) and Minute Entry (Doc. No. [705]) are AFFIRMED.

Date: January 13, 2015

s/Donovan W. Frank
DONOVAN W. FRANK
United States District Judge
2