Another Iowa Victory

[DeanC]

U.S. District Judge Rules in favor of First Amendment Protections Against Osceola County Sheriff Doug Weber’s Retaliatory Denial of Concealed Weapon Permit

Judge Mark Bennett also said, “If I had the legal authority I would order punitive damages be paid as well.”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

June 17, 2010 CONTACT: Vince Fahnlander, 612-341-1074

Sioux City, IA - In a stunning verdict from the bench yesterday, U.S. District Court Judge Mark Bennett announced that Osceola County, IA Sheriff Doug Weber’s denial of Paul Dorr’s concealed weapon permit in 2007 “Was the most egregious violation of the 1st Amendment he has witnessed in his 16 years serving on the bench.”

Paul Dorr and his son Alexander Dorr, of Ocheyedan, IA, filed suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa in October 2008, against Sheriff Weber and Osceola County, Iowa, claiming violation of their 2nd Amendment rights. Sheriff Weber stated in sworn deposition testimony in
November 2009 that he denied Paul Dorr’s conceal carry permit because of Paul Dorr’s speech and political activities in Osceola County. The Dorrs then amended their claim to include a violation of their 1st Amendment rights as well.

When asked at trial in federal court yesterday, “What changed from 2006 (when Sheriff Weber last granted Dorr’s permit) to 2007 (when Sheriff Weber denied Dorr’s permit), Sheriff Weber admitted, “He began writing letters and handing out brochures for the Osceola County Taxpayers Association.” These
are all constitutionally protected activities.

Under cross-examination by Dorr’s attorneys, Sheriff Weber could not produce evidence to support his denial of Paul Dorr’s permit. Neither could the defendant’s only other witness, Dan DeKoter.

Judge Bennett announced that he hadn’t passed judgment from the bench before, always taking it under consideration and issuing a written judgment later. But in Paul Dorr’s case he ruled for the first time, from the bench, on behalf of Dorr.

To minimize any harm to the Osceola County taxpayers, Dorr waived any claim for compensatory or punitive damages prior to the trial. In his ruling, Judge Bennett also announced, “If I had the legal authority I would order punitive damages be paid as well.”

Judge Bennett also announced that if the law permits he may order Sheriff Weber to a take a remedial class in the 1st Amendment.

Attorney Vince Fahnlander stated, “The judgment reinforces that the First Amendment will protect those voices that speak out against the government, and will not tolerate retaliation for speaking out on opinions against governmental authority.”

The Dorrs were represented by attorneys Bill Mohrman and Vince Fahnlander of the Minneapolis law firm Mohrman & Kaardal, P.A.

4100 City Center, 33 S. 6th St. Minneapolis, MN 55402 | 612.341.1074 | support@mklaw.com

[JoeH]

Good stuff! Thanks for posting, Commander Cuff.

[farmerj]

have you got a link for this.

[bstrawse]

have you got a link for this.

http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/news/lo ... 6c5b9.html

[farmerj]

have you got a link for this.

http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/news/lo ... 6c5b9.html

Not the same article, but it will work.

[Shipyard]

Nice! i'm glad to hear SOMEONE giving a damn about something called the constitution...

[DeanC]

have you got a link for this.

I could e-mail you the pdf if you wish.

[EJSG19]

drift:

Is it common for out of state attorneys to represent clients who live in another state? These Iowa folks were represented by Minneapolis attorneys. I always thought it would be helpful to have an in-state attorney, more familiar with your home state's laws. Am I way off on that?

granted this didn't seem to apply as much to state law as to the constitution, but originally it was about an Iowa permit to carry which would be state law...?

[hammAR]

Is it common for out of state attorneys to represent clients who live in another state? These Iowa folks were represented by Minneapolis attorneys. I always thought it would be helpful to have an in-state attorney, more familiar with your home state's laws. Am I way off on that?

It would appear that any Iowa attorneys,
especially ones from Osceola County,
would not only loose their permits, but be dis-barred too.......

[Erik_Pakieser]

I found this document, which denied summary judgement in the initial case. It has a lot of details.

Link

Again, this is not the trial decision, it is a response to a pre-trial motion.

[VikesFan1]

drift:

Is it common for out of state attorneys to represent clients who live in another state? These Iowa folks were represented by Minneapolis attorneys. I always thought it would be helpful to have an in-state attorney, more familiar with your home state's laws. Am I way off on that?

granted this didn't seem to apply as much to state law as to the constitution, but originally it was about an Iowa permit to carry which would be state law...?

Drift on: If they're licensed in Iowa... The big NYC firms flocking to the gulf right now is another good example of interstate practicing. Drift off.

+1 to the Judge.

[onebohemian]

Nice! i'm glad to hear SOMEONE giving a damn about something called the constitution...

Clinton nominee. Former general counsel to Iowa Civil Liberties Union. Darn liberal judges.