Corpus: 543,223 opinions · 3,177 judges · newest 2026-06-23 · expanding Coverage ↗
Opinion

govinfo:USCOURTS-mnd-0_25-cv-00213-12

U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota · 2026-05-06

· GavelSight synced 2026-09-06 03:14:02

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA 
CIVIL NO. 25-213(DSD/DJF) 
 
 
Michael Fiorito, 
 
 
   Plaintiff, 
 
v.          ORDER 
 
Metropolitan Council, 
 
   Defendant. 
 
 
This matter is before the court on the objections by plaintiff 
Michael Fiorito to the April 13, 2026, orders of Magistrate Judge 
Dulce J. Foster. 
The district court will modify or set aside a magistrate 
judge’s order on a nondispositive issue only if it is clearly 
erroneous or contrary to law.  28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A); Fed. R. 
Civ. P. 72(a); D. Minn. L.R. 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. 1995) 
(citations and internal quotation marks omitted).  “A decision is 
contrary to law when it fails to apply or misapplies relevant 
CASE 0:25-cv-00213-MJD-DJF     Doc. 175     Filed 05/06/26     Page 1 of 2
 
 
2 
statutes, case law or rules of procedure.”  Knutson v. Blue Cross 
& Blue Shield of Minn., 254 F.R.D. 553, 556 (D. Minn. 2008) 
(citations and internal quotation marks omitted). 
Fiorito argues that the magistrate judge erred in denying his 
motion for the appointment of counsel and his motion to take more 
depositions than he is currently allotted.  The court finds no 
basis on which to overturn either of the magistrate judge’s 
decisions.  They were not clearly erroneous or contrary to law.  
Accordingly, based on the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 
the objections to the magistrate judge’s orders [ECF Nos. 173, 
174] are overruled. 
 
 
Dated: May 6, 2026 
      s/David S. Doty    
      David S. Doty, Judge 
      United States District Court 
CASE 0:25-cv-00213-MJD-DJF     Doc. 175     Filed 05/06/26     Page 2 of 2

Passage view · GavelSight