Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

13-2119 - Mallak v. Aitkin County et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
13-2119 - Mallak v. Aitkin County et al
March 31, 2014
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. 1. Defendant Hennepin County's Motion to Dismiss and/or for Summary Judgment and/or to Sever (Doc. No. 19) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: a. Defendant Hennepin County's motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 19) is GRANTED, and Hennepin County is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and b. Defendant Hennepin County's motions for summary judgment and to sever (Doc. No. 19) are DENIED AS MOOT. 2. The City Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 43) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: a. Counts II, III and VI are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE in their entirety; b. Count I against the City of Crosslake, the City of Long Prairie, and the City of Pine River is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; andc. Count I against the City of Baxter, the City of Brainerd, the City of Fridley, the City of Little Falls, the City of Minneapolis, the City of St. Cloud and the City of Staples remains. 3. The County Defendants' Motion to Dismiss and/or for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 49) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: a. Counts II, III and VI are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE in their entirety; b. Count I against Scott County and St. Louis County is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and c. Count I against Aitkin County, Cass County, Crow Wing County, Morrison County, and Wright County remains. 4. Defendant Ramsey County's Motion to Dismiss or for Severance (Doc. No. 55) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: a. Defendant Ramsey County's motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 55) is GRANTED, and Ramsey County is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and b. Defendant Ramsey County's motion for severance (Doc. No. 55) is DENIED AS MOOT. 5. The Commissioner Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 30) is GRANTED in its entirety, and the Commissioner Defendants are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 6. The parties shall contact the Magistrate Judges chamber to schedule a settlement conference to occur within sixty (60) days of the date of this Order. 7. Discovery at this stage should be limited to the issue of the permissibility of the relevant accesses. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Donovan W. Frank on 3/31/2014. (BJS)
May 13, 2015
PDF | More
ORDER. 1. Plaintiff Brook Mallak's appeal (Doc. No. 196) of Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois's March 4, 2015 Order is OVERRULED. 2. Magistrate Judge Leo I. Brisbois's March 4, 2015 Order (Doc. No. 193) is AFFIRMED. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge Donovan W. Frank on 5/13/2015. (BJS)
February 1, 2017
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. 1. The Moving Defendants' Joint Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 337) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: a. The Motions are GRANTED with respect to DPPA claims against the Moving Defendants that relate to lookups that occurred before November 5, 2010 (for Defendants first named in the First Amended Complaint) or March 18, 2011 (for Defendants first named in the Second Amended Complaint). Such claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.b. In light of 1(a), above, the following Moving Defendants are DISMISSED from this lawsuit: Ginger Heurung, Michael Triplett, Christine Madsen, Dawn Chouinard, Ryan Barnett, Laura Johnson, Deb Nelson, Colleen Berens, Gary Gutenkauf, Karri Turcotte, Jon Vukelich. c. The Moving Defendants' request to strike Plaintiff's Declaration in opposition to the Moving Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. The Moving Defendants' objections relating to this document are OVERRULED.d. The Moving Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiff's claim relating to the May 4, 2011 access by Defendant Joan Smith, and Defendant Cass County may not be held vicariously liable for the February 2, 2011 access by Defendant Derek LaVoy. Defendants Joan Smith and Cass County are DISMISSED as a result. e. The Moving Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiff's claims relating to the June 21, 2012 and September 5, 2012 accesses by Defendant Shannon Wussow. Defendants Shannon Wussow and CMCC are DISMISSED as a result. f. The Moving Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED with respect to the availability of punitive damages. Plaintiff is not entitled to submit the issue of punitive damages to a jury on this record. g. The Moving Defendants' request for sanctions is DENIED. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Donovan W. Frank on 2/1/2017. (BJS)
August 23, 2017
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. 1. The City Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 376) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: a. The Motion is GRANTED with respect to DPPA claims that relate to lookups that occurred before November 5, 2010 (for Defendants first named in the First Amended Complaint). Such claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. b. In light of 1(a), above, the following Moving Defendants are DISMISSED from this lawsuit: Anthony Runde and David Darling. c. The Motion is GRANTED with respect to Plaintiff's DPPA claim relating to the July 11, 2010 access by Defendant David Darling, and this claim is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. d. In light of 1(c), above, Defendant the City of St. Cloud is DISMISSED from this lawsuit. e. The Motion is GRANTED with respect to the issues of the entities' direct liability and the availability of punitive damages against the municipalities. f. Consistent with the Court's Memorandum Opinion, above, the Motion is otherwise DENIED. 2. Defendant Ryan Goff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 383) is GRANTED as follows: a. Plaintiff's DPPA claim relating to the December 6, 2010 access by Defendant Ryan Goff is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. b. IPPA claim against the City of Staples is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and Defendant the City of Staples is DISMISSED from this lawsuit. (Written Opinion) Signed by Judge Donovan W. Frank on 8/23/2017. (BJS)n light of 2(a), above, Defendant Ryan Goff is DISMISSED from this lawsuit.3. In light of the Court's conclusion that Ryan Goff is entitled to qualified immunity for his December 6, 2010 access of Plaintiff's information, Plaintiff's D