CASE 0:15-cv-04210-RHK-JSM Document 1-2 Filed 11/24/15 Page 1 of 14 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN DISTRICT COURT FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Case Type: Civil Rights Court File No. Nataniel Hanson, Plaintifß, VS City of Richfield, Dustin Schwarze, Nate Kinsey and Aric Gallatin, DEFENDANT CITY OF RICHFIELD, DUSTIN SCHWARZE, NATE KINSEY AND ARIC GALLATIN'S NOTICE OF FILING OF NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO FEDERAL COURT Defendant. TO: The Court Administrator, County of Hennepin, Fourth Judicial District, State of Minnesota; and Tim M. Phillips and Joshua R. Williams, Williams Law,2836 Lyndale Avenue South, Suite 160, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55408, Attorneys for Plaintiff. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that aNotice of Removal of the above-entitled action from the District Court of Hennepin County, Minnesota, Fourth Judicial District, to the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota (a copy of the Notice is annexed hereto) was duly filed on November 24,2015, with the Clerk of the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. All further proceedings with respect to this action shall be before said Court. LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES Dated: l/ - â9 -aat ç Kurtz (# 878s8) 145 University Avenue V/est St. Paul, MN 55103-2044 65r.281.1241 Attorney for Defendants EXHIBIT B CASE 0:15-cv-04210-RHK-JSM Document 1-2 Filed 11/24/15 Page 2 of 14 LINITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Court File No.: Nataniel Hanson, Plaintiffs, NOTICE OF REMOVAL VS. City of Richfield, Dustin Schwarze, Nate Kinsey and Aric Gallatin, Defendant. TO The Clerk of the United States District Court, District of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on November 24,2015, undersigned counsel for Defendants City of Richfield, Dustin Schwarze, Nate Kinsey and Aric Gallatin removed the above-captioned action from the District Court of Hennepin County, Fourth Judicial District, Minnesota, to the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Removal is proper on the following grounds: 1 . On or about November 5, 2015, an action was commenced against Defendants City of Richfield, Dustin Schwarze, Nate Kinsey and Aric Gallatin in the District Court, Fourth Judicial District, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, by service of a Summons and Complaint upon one of the named Defendants. This is the only process, pleadings or orders which have been served upon Defendants to date in the Hennepin County District Court action. A copy of the Summons and Complaint is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Defendants City of Richfield, Dustin Schwarze, Nate CASE 0:15-cv-04210-RHK-JSM Document 1-2 Filed 11/24/15 Page 3 of 14 Kinsey and Aric Gallatin are the only Defendants named in the above-entitled civil action 2. The action described in Paragraph 1 above is a civil action of which this Court has original jurisdiction under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. $ 1,331, in that it is a civil action arising under the laws of the United States and involves a federal question, as Plaintiff alleges in his complaint violations of Federal Constitution-False Anest,42 U.S.C. $ 1983 (Count I); and Federal Constitution-Excessive Force, 42 U.S.C. S 1983 (Count II). As such, this action may be removed to this Court by Defendants pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. $$ 1331 and 1441,. 3. This Notice of Removal is filed within 30 days after the first named Defendant was served with the Summons and Complaint as required by 28 U.S.C $l 446. s/ Daniel P. Kurtz Daniel P. Kurtz (#387858) Date: November 24,2015 LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES 145 University Avenue'West St. Paul, MN 55103-2044 Telephone: (65 1) 281-127 6 Facsimile: (651) 281-1298 Email: dkurtz@lmc.org Attorneys for Defendants 2 CASE 0:15-cv-04210-RHK-JSM Document 1-2 Filed 11/24/15 Page 4 of 14 DISTRICT COURT STATE OF MINNESOTA FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OII HtrNNEPIN Case TYPe: Civil Rights Civil File No. Nataniel Hanson, Plaintiff, SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION VS City of Richfield, Dustin Schwarze' Naie KinseY, and Aric Gallatin, Defendants TO City of Richfield 67OO Portland Avenue Richfietd, MN 55423 Dustin Schwarze Address unknown Nate KinseY Address unknown Aric Gallatin Address unknown t.'YoUAREBEINGSUED'ThePlaintiffhasstartedalawsuitagainst -o^pt^irt against you is attached to this summons' Do not you. The plaintiff,s papers that affect your rights' You throw these papers away. They tr" otri"iul may not yet be filed with the court it must respond to this lawsuit even thougrr this summons' on number and therå may be no court file TO PROTECT YOUR 2. YOU MUST REPLY WITHIN 20 DAYS who signed this summons a RIGHT*. vu.,, ,,'rrut give or mail to the person writtenfesponsecalledanAnswerwithin20daysofthedateonwhichyou receivedthisSummons'YoumustsendacopyofyourAnswertotheperson below' who signed this summons to the address S.YoUMUSTRESPoNDToEACHCLAIM.TheAnswerisyourwritten responsetothePlaintiffsComplaint.InyourAnsweryoumuststatewhether youagreeordisagreewithea"hpu,ao"onof-theComplaint'Ifyoubelievet}re äsked for in the Complaint' you must plaintiff should not be given ",rrty,ftlãg EXHIBIT A CASE 0:15-cv-04210-RHK-JSM Document 1-2 Filed 11/24/15 Page 5 of 14 say so in Your Answer. 4.YoUWILLLoSEYOURcAsEIFYoUDoNoTSENDAWRITTEN REsPoNsEToTHECOMPLAINTToTHEPERSoNwHoSIGNEDTHIS sUMMoNs'IfyoudonotAnswerwithin20days,youwilllosethiscase.You may decide against you will not get to teli your side of the story, and the Court complaint' If you do not and award the Plaintiff everything askld for in the you do not need to respond' want to contest the claims *tu-t"d in the compiaint, you for the relief requested in A default judgment can then be entered against the comPlaint' you may wish to get legal help from a lawyer' If 5. LEGAL ASSISTANCE. may have information about you do not have a lawyer, the court Administrator placeswhereyo,,"..'gerlegalassistance.Evenifyoucannotgetlegalhelp' your rights of you may you must still providã a *iittett Answer to protect lose the case' 6.ALTERNATrVEDISPUTERESoLUTION.Thepartiesmayagreetoor dispute resolution process under be ordered to participate in an alternative You must still send your Rule 114 of the Minåesota General Rules of Practice' writtenresponsetotheComplaintevenifyouexpecttousealternativemeans of resolving this disPute' ,1l,yå Dated: November 3, 2015 Tim M. PhilliPs (# 390907) tphillip @j rwilliam slaw' com ioshua n. Wltti.*s (#389118) jwiliiam @1 rwilliamslaw' com bggo t ynãale Avenue S, suite 160 MinneåPolis, Minnesota 55408 f6L2l 486-5540 io rzi 6o5-L944 Facsimile ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF o CASE 0:15-cv-04210-RHK-JSM Document 1-2 Filed 11/24/15 Page 6 of 14 STATE OF MINNESOTA ISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF HENNtrPTN FOURTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Case TYPe: Civil Rights Civil File Nataniel Hanson, No. Plaintiff, COMPLAINT VS City of Richfield, Dustin Schwarze, Nate KinseY, and Aric Gallatin, Defendants. JURY TRIAL REQUESTED THE PARTIPS l.PiaintiffisanadultmalewhoresidesinMinnesota' 2.DefendantsDustinSchwarze,NateKinsey,andAricGallatinare in this complaint adults who at all times relevant to the allegations set forth as law enforcement were acting under color of state law in their capacities Plaintiff is suing them in officers employed by the city of Richfield, Minnesota' their individual caPacities' 3. of the state of Defendant city of Richfield is a political subdivision Kinsey, and Gallatin Minnesota, Minneapolis empioyed Defendants schwarze, directly at all times relevant to this action' Richfield is sued as police ofticers of respondeat superior or and also, on a1Ì relevant claims, On the theories vicariousliabilityandpursuanttoMinn'Stat'$466'O2fortheunlawful conductofDefendantsSchwarze,Kinsey,andGallatin'Richfietdisthe political subdivision charged with training and supervising 1aw enforcement officers.Richfieldhasestablishedandimplemented,ordelegatedthe CASE 0:15-cv-04210-RHK-JSM Document 1-2 Filed 11/24/15 Page 7 of 14 responsibiiity for establishing and implementing, policies, practices, procedures, and customs used by law enforcement officers employed by Richfield regarding seizures and the use of force. Richfield is therefore also being sued directly pursuant ta Monell u. Dept. o/ Soc, Sucs', 436 U.S. 658 (1e78), JURISDICTIO N AND VENUE 4. This is an action for monetary and declaratory relief under 42 U.S.C, SS i983 and 1988. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to Minn. Stat. $ 4B4.OI et seq. Venue lies properly in Hennepin County, Minnesota pursuant to Minn. Stat. S 542.01 et seq., as the events giving rise to this action occurred in Hennepin County. GENERI\L ê.,LLEGAIrONS 5. On December 1 I , zOL 1 , at or around 2:27 a.m., Plaintiff was a passenger in a vehicle stopped by Richfield police officers. 6. Piaintiff identified himself with his driver's license' Z. Officer Schwarze performed one or more field sobriety tests on the driver of the vehicle. 8. Officer Schwarze informed Plaintiff and another passenger in the vehicle that if they exited the vehicie, he would "beat the shit out of' them' L When officer schwarze made this comment, he was pointing his Taser at Plaintiff. 10. sergeant steen then approached the back seat with officer Schwarze and instructed Plaintiff to exit the vehicle' c CASE 0:15-cv-04210-RHK-JSM Document 1-2 Filed 11/24/15 Page 8 of 14 1 1. Plaintiff did not immediately exit the vehicle, however, because Sergeant Steen's instruction flatly contradicted Officer Schwarze's instruction; so Plaintiff did not know whether Sergeant Steen was ordering him to exit or daring him to exit and have Officer Schwarze Taser or "beat the shit out of' him. 72. Officer Kinsey hit Plaintiff in face with a closed fist, 13, Officers pulled Piaintiff frclm the rear of the vehicle, 14. Piaintiff was prone on the ground and his hands were above his 15. Officer Kinsey hit Plaintiff with a closed fist approximately nine head, more times. 76. Officer Schwarze removed the cartridge from his Taser, held the trigger down, and delivered drive stuns to Plaintiff.l 17, Officer Schwarze delivered approximately three drive stuns to Plaintiff for at least one to two seconds each. 18. Officer Schwarze also managed to drive stun Officer Cook in the left leg. 1g. Officer Gallatin kicked Plaintiff approximately three times and stomped on him approximately twice. 20. Officers handcuffed Plaintiff' When the cartridge is removed, the Taser may be operated in "drive stun" mode and used as ä pain compliance tool. In drive stun mode, the Taser's electrical probes are ãpplied directly to the person, causing incapacitating pain 1 .) CASE 0:15-cv-04210-RHK-JSM Document 1-2 Filed 11/24/15 Page 9 of 14 2I. Plaintiff was arrested for, but not convicted of, felony fourth degree assault against a police officer. 22. Plaintiff was transportecl to and booked at the Hennepin County Jail, CO-UNT I DEPRTVATION OF CrvIL RIGHTS IN VTOLATION Oî 42 U.S.C. S 1983 AND THÐ FOURTH AND FOURTEENTH AI/IENDMENTS. FALSE ARREST 23. Plaintiff restates the allegations contained in the preceding paragraphs as though fully incorporated herein. 24. Defendants, acting under color of state law, arrested Plaintiff without a warrant. 25. At the time Defendants arrested Plaintiff without a warrant, it was clearly established that a warrantless arrest complies with the Fourth Amendment only "if it is supported by probable cause." Borgman u. Kedley, 646 F.3d 578,522 (Bth Cir. 2011). 26. Defendants did not have probable cause) or even arguable probable cause, to arrest Plaintiff. 27 . Defendants, by arresting Plaintiff without a warrant or probable cause, caused Plaintiff harm, couNLII DþpRrvATroN oF cIVru RIGHTS IN VIOLATION OF 42 U.S.C. S 1983 THE FOURTH AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENTS 28. - Plaintiff restates the allegations contained in the previous paragraphs as if fully incorporated herein. 4 AND EXCESSIVE FORCE CASE 0:15-cv-04210-RHK-JSM Document 1-2 Filed 11/24/15 Page 10 of 14 29. f)efendants, acting under color of state law, used force against Plaintiff. 30. This use of force was excessive because it was not reasonably necessary under the circumstances, 31, Plaintiff was harmed as a direct result of this excessive use of 32. At the time of this excessive use of force, it was clearly established force, that the Fourth Amendment ggarantees the right to be free from unreasonable seizures, which includes the right to be free from excessive force by police officers, 33, Even if Defendants did not use excessive force against Plaintiff, they witnessed one or more other officers using excessive force against Plaintiff 94. At the time Defendants used force against Plaintiff, it was clearly established that police officers have an affirmative duty to intervene on behalf of people whose Fourth Amendment rights are being violated in their presence by one or more other officers, Webb u. Higkel, T13 F.2d 405, 408 (8th Cir. 1983); Putman u. Gerloff,639 F,2d 4I5,423 (Bth Cir' 1981). ' 35. Defendants failed to intervene on Plaintiff's behalf. 36, Plaintiff was harmed as a direct result of this failure to intervene. JURY DEMAND- 37. Plaintiff demands a jury trial' REQUEST T'OR RELIEF' WHEREFORtr, Plaintiff respectfuily requests that the Court: 5 CASE 0:15-cv-04210-RHK-JSM Document 1-2 Filed 11/24/15 Page 11 of 14 1 Enter judgment in Plaintiff's favor on his claims against Defendants in an amount exceeding $50,000, including litigation expenses and attorneys'fees, the exact amount to be proven at trial; 2 Declare that Defendants' conduct, as set forth above, violated 42 u.s,c. s i9B3; .) Award Plaintiff damages to compensate him for the harm he suffered as a resuit of Defendants'unlawful conduct; 4 If Defendants remove this case to federal court, award Plaintiff punitive damages with respect to his claims under federal law, the exact amount to be proven at trial; 5 Grant Plaintiff leave to amend this Complaint to include a claim for punitive damages, the exact amount to be proven at trial; 6 Award Plaintiff reasonable expenses incurred in this litigation, including attorney and expert fees, pursuant lo 42 U.S.C. S 1988; statutory relief to which he is entitled; 7 Grant Plaintiff B Grant Plaintiff leave to amend this Complaint to supplement any al1 factuai deficiencies or otherwise address any pleading deficiencies herein; and I Grant any other relief the Court deems just and equitable. 6 CASE 0:15-cv-04210-RHK-JSM Document 1-2 Filed 11/24/15 Page 12 of 14 ;l\* \ Dated: November 3, 2015 Tim M. Phillips (#390907) tphillip @j rwilliam slaw, com Joshua R. \Milliams {#389118) jwilliam @j rwilliam slaw. com 2836 Lyndale Avenue S, Suite 160 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55408 (612) 486-5540 (6 12) 605- 1944 Facsimile ATTORNDYS FOR PLAINTIFF 7 CASE 0:15-cv-04210-RHK-JSM Document 1-2 Filed 11/24/15 Page 13 of 14 4.CKNOTVLEDqEI4pNT REQUTRED By MrNN. STAT. S 549.211 Plaintiff, through undersigned counsel, acknowledges that sanctions, attorneys'fees, and witness fees may be imposed under Minn. Stat. S 54g.21I I Dated: November 3, 2015 'F Tim M. Phillips (#390907) tphillip @j rwilliam slaw. com Joshua R. Williams (#389118) jwiliiam @jrwilliam slaw, com 2836 Lyndale Avenue S, Suite 160 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55408' (61.2) 486-5s40 (6 12) 605- 7944 Facsimíle ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIF'F B CASE 0:15-cv-04210-RHK-JSM Document 1-2 Filed 11/24/15 Page 14 of 14 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL Hanson v. Richfield STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) Linda J. Durrence, being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that on November 24, 2015, she served the following: 1. Notice of Filing of Notice of Removal by depositing a copy of said documents in an envelope, postage prepaid, at St. Paul, Minnesota, addressed as follows: Tim M. Phillips Joshua R. Williams Law Office of Joshua R. Williams, PLLC 2836 Lyndale Avenue South, Suite 160 Minneapolis, MN 55408 K_ Subscribed and sworn to before me this 24th day of November, 2015. Notary Publ. ESLEY R. BROWN r Notary Public-Minnesota M My Commission Expires Jen 91. 2020 f da J. Durre ce N,