Alexsis C. Beach & Rachel Lederman - Civil Rights, Human Rights, Community Legal Services

POLICE MISCONDUCT

TENANTS’ RIGHTS

FAMILY LAW

PERSONAL INJURY

LATEST FACEBOOK POSTS

Beach Lederman Attorneys

1 week ago

Small but significant victory in our lawsuit re: police violence at Standing Rock. ... See MoreSee Less

Water Protector Civil Lawsuit | Water Protector Legal Collective

l.facebook.com

The Backwater Bridge Lawsuit is Moving Forward! Long-awaited court ruling allows discovery to proceed re Nov 20, 2016, police attack on water protectors.

View on Facebook

Beach Lederman Attorneys

1 month ago

Sheriff Kirchmeier & cronies are trying to stop discovery from going forward in the Backwater Bridge lawsuit, but we've asked the court to throw their frivolous appeal out.

ND Pipeline Protesters Ask 8th Circ. To Reject Police Appeal
By Michael Phillis

Law360 (October 22, 2020, 5:33 PM EDT) -- A group of Dakota Access pipeline protesters have said it's too soon for the Eighth Circuit to review a discovery order in a proposed class action alleging law enforcement used excessive force during a protest.

The protesters told the court Wednesday it's inappropriate for law enforcement individuals to ask for an interlocutory appeal when the underlying issue hasn't yet been decided by the lower court. The trial court judge simply declined to decide a motion to dismiss right away and allowed for some discovery, making an appeal premature, they said.

At issue is whether Morton County Sheriff Kyle Kirchmeier and several others can assert qualified immunity from allegations that the officers violated the protesters' constitutional rights by using explosive tear gas grenades, water cannons and other munitions against them.

Law enforcement in 2018 asked the lower court to kill the claims alleging they aren't viable. But the lower court transformed the dismissal bid into a summary judgment motion and decided to rule on the matter later on.

"When a district court defers ruling, but is clear, as it was here, that the district court does intend to rule on a motion asserting an immunity defense, and the court has not unreasonably delayed in doing so, the lack of a ruling is neither an implicit nor effective denial of immunity and the appellate court lacks jurisdiction to consider an interlocutory appeal," the protesters said.

The lower court only allowed for limited discovery "sufficient to resolve the issue of qualified immunity" before deciding the matter, according to the protesters.

The dispute stretches back to a Nov. 20, 2016, incident in which Dakota Access pipeline protesters who had gathered at a bridge north of a large campsite were met with a "joint force of police officers" from the counties and cities, who deployed "an arsenal of dangerous implements and devices" including tear gas, according to the group's complaint. In addition to allegations against law enforcement, Morton County and other local governments are also named as defendants.

The protesters allege that without first giving dispersal orders, law enforcement used force "including soaking them in water despite the subfreezing temperature," according to the complaint that says over 200 people were injured.

The protesters said the appeals court should let the lower court proceed.

"Such discovery does not unfairly strip the law enforcement officers of the benefits of their asserted qualified immunity," the protesters said, asking the Eighth Circuit to throw out the interlocutory appeal.

U.S. District Judge Daniel L. Hovland denied the motion for a temporary restraining order that the group filed shortly after launching the lawsuit, saying they had not met their burden of proof to show police used unnecessary and excessive force that would warrant blocking future use of the tactics they employed that day. The group appealed that decision, but the Eighth Circuit upheld it.

In April 2018, the North Dakota jurisdictions and law officers asked to scrap the protesters' claims altogether. Among other things, they argued that the individual officers are immune.

"Even assuming, arguendo, plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged a violation of their constitutional rights, individual law enforcement officers are entitled to qualified immunity as any right allegedly violated was not so clearly established at the time of the violation that a reasonable officer would have known that his actions were unlawful," the defendants said at the time.

Earlier in October, law enforcement asked for the lower court to halt proceedings while the Eighth Circuit considers the interlocutory appeal. The protesters are fighting that request.

Randall J. Bakke, an attorney with Bakke Grinolds Wiederholt who represents law enforcement, said the 2014 Eighth Circuit case Christopher Payne v. Fred Britten et al. established that officers are due a decision on their qualified immunity claim "at the motion to dismiss stage, prior to discovery, and the court may not defer ruling" in the way the lower court did.

"The plaintiffs' request for dismissal of the individual law enforcement defendants' interlocutory appeal on the issue of qualified immunity on the alleged basis of lack of appellate jurisdiction is contrary to established Eighth Circuit precedent directly on point," Bakke told Law360 in an email Thursday.

Rachel Lederman, who represents the protesters, said her clients are "still suffering from the traumatic effects of the law enforcement violence we are challenging in this case." She added that she appreciated that the case was finally moving forward with limited discovery after a long wait.

"The appeal is frivolous and made purely for delay," Lederman told Law360 in an email.

Lederman added that the governmental defendants, including Morton County, the City of Mandan and Stutsman County, can't call on the qualified immunity doctrine to protect them and that the appeal is specific to law enforcement personnel. The discovery the lower court allowed would be "identical even if the government entities were the only defendants," Lederman said.

"We have to wonder what the defense is so worried will come out if discovery goes forward," Lederman said.

The protesters are represented by Rachel Lederman of Alexsis C. Beach & Rachel Lederman Attorneys, Mara Verheyden-Hilliard of the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund, Natali Segovia of Water Protector Legal Collective, Melinda Power of West Town Law Office and Janine L. Hoft of People's Law Office.

The defendants are represented by Randall J. Bakke and Shawn A. Grinolds of Bakke Grinolds Wiederholt.

The case is Vanessa Dundon et al. v. Kyle Kirchmeier et al., case number 20-3106, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit.

https://www.law360.com/articles/1321762/nd-pipeline-protesters-ask-8th-circ-to-reject-police-appeal ... See MoreSee Less

ND Pipeline Protesters Ask 8th Circ. To Reject Police Appeal - Law360

l.facebook.com

A group of Dakota Access pipeline protesters have said it's too soon for the Eighth Circuit to review a discovery order in a proposed class action alleging law enforcement used excessive force during ...

View on Facebook

Beach Lederman Attorneys

2 months ago

http://sfadc.org/landingpage/covid-19/ ... See MoreSee Less

SFADC | COVID-19

l.facebook.com

Resources for San Francisco tenants during COVID-19 / Coronavirus, eviction moratorium, tenant counseling, and more

View on Facebook

LATEST NEWS

Water Protector Civil Lawsuit Moving Forward!
September 23, 2020
On September 10, 2020, in a long-awaited ruling, Judge Daniel …Read More »
Rachel quoted in: “State High Court to Cops: No, You Can’t Charge $3,000 for Body Camera Videos”
May 29, 2020
KQED article on the May 28 California Supreme Court decision …Read More »
State Supreme Court Rules in Favor of NLG in Police Body Camera Records Case
May 28, 2020
Today, in litigation brought by the National Lawyers Guild, San …Read More »
San Francisco Tenants & COVID-19
April 3, 2020
Are you a San Francisco tenant who can’t pay rent …Read More »
Statewide rent control in Oregon!
February 27, 2019
Oregon is poised to become the first state in the …Read More »
San Francisco Eviction Control Law Strengthened
February 18, 2019
The SF Board of Supervisors has passed a new ordinance …Read More »

$4.5M for Scott Olsen

Challenging Police Racial Profiling

Stopping Militarized Police Repression at Standing Rock

Upholding Housing Rights

Fighting Sexual Harassment on Campus

Changing How OPD Polices Demonstrations

Rachel Lederman and Alexsis C. Beach have been providing high quality, affordable legal services for 30 years. Our mission is to advance social justice by advocating for, and working collaboratively with, those who are disempowered in the legal system.

POLICE MISCONDUCT

TENANTS’ RIGHTS

FAMILY LAW

PERSONAL INJURY

LATEST FACEBOOK POSTS

LATEST NEWS

Water Protector Civil Lawsuit Moving Forward!

Rachel quoted in: “State High Court to Cops: No, You Can’t Charge $3,000 for Body Camera Videos”

State Supreme Court Rules in Favor of NLG in Police Body Camera Records Case

San Francisco Tenants & COVID-19

Statewide rent control in Oregon!

San Francisco Eviction Control Law Strengthened

Alexsis C. Beach & Rachel Lederman, Attorneys

Phone | Fax

Phone 415-282-9300
Fax 415-285-5066

$4.5M for Scott Olsen

Challenging Police Racial Profiling

Stopping Militarized Police Repression at Standing Rock

Upholding Housing Rights

Fighting Sexual Harassment on Campus

Changing How OPD Polices Demonstrations

Rachel Lederman and Alexsis C. Beach have been providing high quality, affordable legal services for 30 years. Our mission is to advance social justice by advocating for, and working collaboratively with, those who are disempowered in the legal system.

POLICE MISCONDUCT

TENANTS’ RIGHTS

FAMILY LAW

PERSONAL INJURY

LATEST FACEBOOK POSTS

LATEST NEWS

Water Protector Civil Lawsuit Moving Forward!

Rachel quoted in: “State High Court to Cops: No, You Can’t Charge $3,000 for Body Camera Videos”

State Supreme Court Rules in Favor of NLG in Police Body Camera Records Case

San Francisco Tenants & COVID-19

Statewide rent control in Oregon!

San Francisco Eviction Control Law Strengthened

Alexsis C. Beach & Rachel Lederman, Attorneys

Phone | Fax

Phone 415-282-9300 Fax 415-285-5066

Phone 415-282-9300
Fax 415-285-5066