Case 6:14-cv AA Document 14 Filed 01/19/15 Page 1 of 5

Transcription

1 Case 6:14-cv AA Document 14 Filed 01/19/15 Page 1 of 5 Portland, OR Telephone: ( Facsimile: ( [email protected] [email protected] Of Attorneys for Defendant Mikkola IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PETER LICHTE, JARROD BOWERS and DANIEL KELLY, v. Plaintiffs, CITY OF WOODBURN, WOODBURN, POLICE CHIEF SCOTT RUSSELL; WOODBURN POLICE CAPTAIN JASON ALEXANDER; WOODBURN POLICE SGT. JOHN MIKKOLA; and MICHAEL HEREFORD, HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR; all by and through the Woodburn Police Department and Human Resources Department, City of Woodburn, a political subdivision of the State of Oregon; and John Does 1-10, unknown-named individuals, Defendants. Case No. 6:14-cv AA DEFENDANT JOHN MIKKOLA S ANSWER TO (Demand for Jury Trial Page 1 - (

2 Case 6:14-cv AA Document 14 Filed 01/19/15 Page 2 of 5 In answer to plaintiffs Complaint, defendant John Mikkola, for himself alone, admits, denies and alleges as follows: 1. Admit jurisdiction and venue are proper based on plaintiffs allegations and claims. 2. Incorporate by this reference the admissions in paragraphs 5-9 of DEFENDANTS CITY OF WOODBURN, SCOTT RUSSELL, JASON ALEXANDER AND MICHAEL HEREFORD S ANSWER. 3. Admit the following: Defendant Mikkola was hired as a Patrol Officer by the City of Woodburn Police Department in approximately In 2008 defendant Mikkola was one of multiple officers who responded to a report of a suspicious package outside a bank in Woodburn. The package turned out to be a bomb, which detonated, killing two officers and severely injuring another. In 2009 defendant Mikkola was promoted to Sergeant. In March, 2010 defendant Mikkola was shot multiple times in the line of duty while attempting to apprehend a criminal suspect and was off work for an extended period as a result of his injuries. In November, 2011 defendant Mikkola was placed on administrative leave by the Woodburn Chief of Police. Although defendant Mikkola remained an employee of the City of Woodburn for an extended period of time thereafter, he never returned to work at the Woodburn Police Department, nor did he Page 2 - (

3 Case 6:14-cv AA Document 14 Filed 01/19/15 Page 3 of 5 perform the duties/functions of a Woodburn police officer and his employment relationship with the City eventually ended. To the extent any conduct by defendant Mikkola as alleged in the Complaint actually occurred, he was acting at all times within the course and scope of his employment with defendant City. 4. Except as expressly admitted above, defendant Mikkola denies the remaining allegations of the Complaint either because they are untrue, and/or because they are inaccurate as phrased, and/or because he lacks information sufficient to form a belief as to their truth, and/or because they are directed at other parties and/or because they are conclusions of law. Defendant Mikkola specifically denies each Claim for Relief alleged against him. BY WAY OF FURTHER ANSWER AND FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, 5. Plaintiffs claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the applicable statute of limitations and/or statute of ultimate repose. BY WAY OF FURTHER ANSWER AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, 6. Plaintiffs state law claims are subject to the conditions, limitations and immunities contained in Oregon s Tort Claims Act, including, but not limited to the Page 3 - (

4 Case 6:14-cv AA Document 14 Filed 01/19/15 Page 4 of 5 limitations period for commencing such claims, the tort claims notice period, and the cap/limitation on damages. ORS et. seq. BY WAY OF FURTHER ANSWER AND FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, 7. Defendant Mikkola is entitled to qualified immunity with respect to plaintiffs federal law claims. BY WAY OF FURTHER ANSWER AND FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, claims. 8. Defendant Mikkola is not a proper party on all or some of plaintiffs state law WHEREFORE, having fully answered plaintiffs Complaint, defendant Mikkola prays for judgment in his favor, to include an award of his costs, disbursements and attorney fees incurred herein pursuant to 42 U.S.C on the grounds that some or all of plaintiffs claims are frivolous. Defendant Mikkola respectfully demands trial by jury. DATED this 19 th day of January, By: /s/ Robert S. Wagner Page 4 - (

5 Case 6:14-cv AA Document 14 Filed 01/19/15 Page 5 of 5 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Of Attorneys for Def. Mikkola ( I hereby certify that I served the foregoing DEFENDANT JOHN MIKKOLA S ANSWER TO, on the following parties at the following addresses by notice of electronic filing using the CM/ECF system: Jeffrey H. Boiler Attorney at Law P.O. Box 101 Vida, Oregon jboiler@[email protected] Of Attorneys for Plaintiffs Karen M. Vickers Mersereau Shannon LLP 1 SW Columbia St., Suite 1600 Portland, Oregon , ext. 206 [email protected] Of Attorneys for Woodburn Defendants DATED this 19 th day of January, /s/ Robert S. Wagner Page 1 - CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE (