Sorenson v. State of Minnesota et al.

Filing 169

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 160 re Motion for Sanctions filed by Minnesota Department of Human Services, Eric Falk, Nicole D. Boder, Krista Lynn Gilpin 167 . (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Katherine M. Menendez on 1/19/2023. (BJP)

CASE 0:21-cv-00671-KMM-DJF Doc. 169 Filed 01/19/23 Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Eric M. Sorenson, also known as, Cherrity
Honesty-Alexis Meranelli,

No. 21-cv-671 (KMM/DJF)

Plaintiff,
ORDER
v.
State of Minensota, et al.,
Defendants.

The above matter comes before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation
(R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Dulce J. Foster, dated November 21, 2022. [Doc.
167]. In the R&R, Judge Foster recommends that the Defendants’ motion for sanctions be
granted in part and denied in part such that: (1) Plaintiff Cherrity Meranelli be precluded
from offering into evidence any information in support of her claims that Defendants
solicited from her and that she failed to produce in discovery; (2) Defendants’ motion to
dismiss the case with prejudice be denied; (3) Defendants’ motion to strike the Complaint
and Amended Complaints be denied; and Defendants’ request for findings of fact be
denied. No objections have been filed to that R&R in the time period permitted by either
Ms. Meranelli or the Defendants.
The Court reviews de novo any portion of the R&R to which specific objections are
made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); D. Minn. LR 72.2(b). In the absence of objections, the Court
reviews the R&R for clear error. Nur v. Olmsted County, 563 F. Supp. 3d 946, 949 (D.

CASE 0:21-cv-00671-KMM-DJF Doc. 169 Filed 01/19/23 Page 2 of 2

Minn. 2021) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) and Grinder v. Gammon, 73 F.3d 793, 795 (8th
Cir. 1996) (per curiam)). Based on the Court's careful review of the R&R the Court finds
no error.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The Report and Recommendation [Doc. 167] is ACCEPTED;
2. Defendants’ motion for discovery sanctions [Doc. 160] is GRANTED IN PART and
DENIED IN PART as follows:
a. Plaintiff is precluded from offering into evidence any information in support
of her claims that Defendants solicited from her and that she failed to produce
in discovery;
b. Defendants’ request for dismissal of the case with prejudice is DENIED;
c. Defendants’ request to strike Plaintiff’s Complaint and Amended Complaints
is DENIED; and
d. Defendants’ request for findings of fact is DENIED.

Date: January 19, 2023

s/ Katherine M. Menendez
Katherine M. Menendez
United States District Judge