Opsahl v. Jaimet et al
| Denis J. Opsahl |
| Matthew Michael Jaimet and Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility |
| 0:2009cv02567 |
| September 18, 2009 |
| US District Court for the District of Minnesota |
| DMN Office |
| Hennepin |
| Doty |
| Keyes |
| Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
16
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Adopting 3 Report and Recommendation; Denying 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Denis J. Opsahl. Plaintiff's claims against Michael Hager are dismissed as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. (Written Opinion). Signed by Senior Judge David S. Doty on 1/29/2010. (PJM)
|
|
Filing
3
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: that: 1. Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis, Docket No. 2 , be DENIED; 2. This action be SUMMARILY DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b); 3. Plaintiff be required to pay the unpaid balance of the Court filing fee, namely the full $350.00, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2); and 4. For purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), this action be dismissed "on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted." Objections to R&R due by 10/15/2009 Signed by Magistrate Judge Jeffrey J. Keyes on 10/01/2009. (MMP)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
