82-CV-24-2845
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
6/12/2024 11:31 AM
STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF WASHINGTON TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
_____________________________________________________________________________
Tristen Forstner, Court File No.____________
Plaintiff,
v. DEFENDANTS’ ANSWER
City of Forest Lake, Richard Peterson, in
in his individual and official capacities,
Greg Weiss, in his individual and official
capacities,
Defendants.
______________________________________________________________________________
Defendants City of Forest Lake, Richard Peterson, and Greg Weiss (hereinafter
collectively, “Defendants”), for their Answer to plaintiff Tristen Forstner’s Complaint, state as
follows:
FIRST DEFENSE
1. Admit the allegations of paragraph 1 on information and belief.
2. Admit the allegations of paragraph 2.
3. Admit the allegations of paragraph 3.
4. Admit the allegations of paragraph 4.
5. Admit the allegations of the second sentence; affirmatively state that the
remainder of the allegations of paragraph 5 state legal conclusions to which no response is
required at this time; and deny the allegations to the extent it is stated or implied that defendants
engaged in any unlawful or other wrongful conduct.
6. Admit the allegations of paragraph 6.
82-CV-24-2845
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
6/12/2024 11:31 AM
7. Lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations of paragraph 7.
8. Admit the allegations of paragraph 8.
9. Lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations of paragraph 9.
10. Lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations of paragraph 10.
11. Admit the allegations of paragraph 11.
12. Admit the allegations of paragraph 12.
13. Deny the allegations of paragraph 13.
14. Deny the allegations of paragraph 14 as stated; and affirmatively state that no
formal statement was taken.
15. Deny the allegations of paragraph 15 as stated; and affirmatively state that no
formal statement was taken.
16. Deny the allegations of paragraph 16 as stated; and affirmatively state that no
formal statement was taken.
17. Deny the allegations of paragraph 17 as stated; and affirmatively state that no
formal statement was taken.
18. Deny the allegations of paragraph 18 as stated; and affirmatively state that no
formal statement was taken.
19. Admit that defendant Peterson sustained a complaint against plaintiff, and that
plaintiff was no longer employed by the City at that the time; and deny to the extent it is stated or
implied that defendants engaged in any unlawful or other wrongful conduct.
2
82-CV-24-2845
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
6/12/2024 11:31 AM
20. Deny the allegations of paragraph 20.
21. Admit that defendants informed the Woodbury Police Department that defendant
Peterson had sustained a complaint against plaintiff; and deny the remainder of the allegations of
paragraph 21.
22. Deny the allegations of paragraph 22.
23. Lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations of paragraph 23.
24. Lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations of paragraph 24.
25. No separate response is required to paragraph 25.
26. The allegations of paragraph 26 state legal conclusions to which no response is
required at this time; and deny the remainder of the allegations to the extent it is stated or implied
that defendants engaged in any unlawful or other wrongful conduct.
27. The allegations of paragraph 27 state legal conclusions to which no response is
required at this time; and deny the remainder of the allegations to the extent it is stated or implied
that defendants engaged in any unlawful or other wrongful conduct.
28. The allegations of paragraph 28 state legal conclusions to which no response is
required at this time; and deny the remainder of the allegations to the extent it is stated or implied
that defendants engaged in any unlawful or other wrongful conduct.
29. The allegations of paragraph 29 state legal conclusions to which no response is
required at this time; and deny the remainder of the allegations to the extent it is stated or implied
that defendants engaged in any unlawful or other wrongful conduct.
30. Deny the allegations of paragraph 30.
3
82-CV-24-2845
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
6/12/2024 11:31 AM
31. The allegations of paragraph 31 state legal conclusions to which no response is
required at this time; and deny the remainder of the allegations to the extent it is stated or implied
that defendants engaged in any unlawful or other wrongful conduct.
32. The allegations of paragraph 32 state legal conclusions to which no response is
required at this time; and deny the remainder of the allegations to the extent it is stated or implied
that defendants engaged in any unlawful or other wrongful conduct.
33. No separate response is required to paragraph 33.
34. Lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations of paragraph 34.
35. Deny the allegations of paragraph 35.
36. Deny the allegations of paragraph 36.
37. Deny the allegations of paragraph 37.
38. Lack knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations regarding the existence of a contract; and deny the remainder of the allegations of
paragraph 38.
39. Deny the allegations of paragraph 39.
40. No separate response is required to paragraph 40.
41. Admit the allegations of paragraph 41.
42. Deny the allegations of paragraph 42.
43. Deny the allegations of paragraph 43.
44. Deny the allegations of paragraph 44.
45. Admits plaintiff seeks actual compensatory tort damages in his Complaint; and
deny the remainder of the allegations of paragraph 45.
4
82-CV-24-2845
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
6/12/2024 11:31 AM
46. Deny the allegations of paragraph 46.
47. Except as otherwise expressly admitted, qualified, or denied herein, defendant
denies each and every allegation of the Complaint.
SECOND DEFENSE
48. Plaintiff’s Complaint fails to state claims upon which relief may be granted.
THIRD DEFENSE
49. Defendants satisfied any and all applicable constitutional requirements in the
investigation of Plaintiff’s conduct while employed with defendant City.
FOURTH DEFENSE
50. Defendants fully complied with any legal obligations under the Peace Officer
Discipline Procedures Act, Minn. Stat. §626.89, et seq.
FIFTH DEFENSE
51. The actions of defendants Peterson and Weiss were objectively reasonable and
authorized by law, and they are immune from liability under the doctrines of qualified immunity,
official immunity, vicarious official immunity, statutory immunity, and under the provisions of
Minn. Stat. § 466.03.
SIXTH DEFENSE
52. Some or all of plaintiff’s claims fail because defendants acted at all times in the
reasonable belief their actions were lawful, in good faith, with proper motive and intent, and without
malice or reckless indifference to plaintiff’s rights.
SEVENTH DEFENSE
53. Some or all of plaintiff’s claims fail because defendants acted with legal
justification and privilege.
5
82-CV-24-2845
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
6/12/2024 11:31 AM
EIGHTH DEFENSE
54. Some or all of plaintiff’s claims fail because defendants did not intentionally
interfere with any contract or engage in any act of interference that was independently tortious or
in violation of a state or federal law or regulation.
NINTH DEFENSE
55. Some or all of plaintiff’s claims fail because defendants’ statements were true.
TENTH DEFENSE
56. Some or all of plaintiff’s claims fail because defendants’ statements were on
matters of public concern and made without actual malice.
ELEVENTH DEFENSE
57. Some or all of plaintiff’s claims fail because defendants’ statements were
protected by a qualified privilege that was not abrogated by malice.
TWELFTH DEFENSE
58. Defendants’ acts or omissions, if any, were not the cause of any of the losses or
damages alleged in plaintiff’s Complaint, and instead the superseding cause of any such losses or
damages consisted of intervening actions or inactions of plaintiff or third parties over whom
defendants had no control.
THIRTEENTH DEFENSE
59. Plaintiff has failed to mitigate his damages, if any, and therefore plaintiff’s
damages claims must be reduced, diminished, or defeated by such amounts as should have been
so mitigated.
6
82-CV-24-2845
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
6/12/2024 11:31 AM
FOUTEENTH DEFENSE
60. As a separate and alternative defense to the claims alleged in plaintiff’s
Complaint, defendants assert that they may have additional defenses, including without
limitation, some or all of the affirmative defenses contemplated by Minnesota Rule of Civil
Procedure 8.03, but the applicability of any such additional defenses cannot be known until
defendants have had an opportunity to conduct discovery, and defendants therefore reserve and
assert all such defenses.
WHEREFORE, defendants request the judgment of this Court dismissing plaintiff’s
claims with prejudice, awarding defendants all costs, disbursements and attorney fees associated
with this litigation, and granting such other and further relief as the Court deems just and
equitable.
Dated: December 8, 2023 FLEMING-WOLFE LAW, P.A.
By: s/Julie Fleming-Wolfe
Julie Fleming-Wolfe (Reg. No. 175377)
2184 Sargent Avenue
St. Paul, Minnesota 55105
Telephone: (651) 767-8642
[email protected] ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The undersigned hereby acknowledges that costs, disbursements and reasonable attorney
and witness fees may be awarded pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 549.211, subd. 2, to the party against
whom the allegations in this pleading are asserted.
__s/Juie Fleming-Wolfe____________________
Julie Fleming-Wolfe
