Kunshier v. Dayton et al

Filing 43

ORDER ACCEPTINGD REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Report and Recommendation 42 is ACCEPTED. Petitioner Robert A. Kunshier's application to proceed in forma pauperis 2 is DENIED. Kunshier's motions for appointment of counsel 4 35 ar e DENIED. Kunshier's motion to lift stay 34 is DENIED AS MOOT. Kunshier's motion to determine whether the courts have granted ex parte communications to respondents' counsel 38 is GRANTED as explained in the Report and Recommendation. No certificate of appealability shall issue. LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.(Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Eric C. Tostrud on 12/30/2022.(RMM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Robert A. Kunshier,

File No. 16-cv-792 (ECT/TNL)

Petitioner,
v.

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT
AND RECOMMENDATION

Tim Walz, as Governor of the State of
Minnesota;
Jodi Harpstead, as Commissioner of the
Minnesota Department of Human Services;1
and The State of Minnesota,
Respondents.
________________________________________________________________________
Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung issued a Report and Recommendation on
December 8, 2022.

ECF No. 42.

No party has objected to that Report and

Recommendation, and it is therefore reviewed for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b);
Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Finding no clear error,
and based upon all of the files, records, and proceedings in the above-captioned matter, IT
IS ORDERED THAT:
1.

The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 42] is ACCEPTED.

2.

Petitioner Robert A. Kunshier’s application to proceed in forma pauperis

[ECF No. 2] is DENIED.

1

Mark Dayton and Emily Johnson Piper were named by Kunshier as respondents to
this action in their official capacities as Governor of Minnesota and Commissioner of the
Minnesota Department of Human Services, respectively. Those respondents have been
automatically substituted by the current holders of those offices pursuant to Rule 25(d) of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

3.

Kunshier’s motions for appointment of counsel [ECF Nos. 4 & 35] are

DENIED.
4.

Kunshier’s motion to lift stay [ECF No. 34] is DENIED AS MOOT.

5.

Kunshier’s motion to determine whether the courts have granted ex parte

communications to respondents’ counsel [ECF No. 38] is GRANTED as explained in the
Report and Recommendation.
6.

No certificate of appealability shall issue.
LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.

Dated: December 30, 2022

s/ Eric C. Tostrud
Eric C. Tostrud
United States District Court

2