27 October 2023
DULUTH A judge is slated to again take up a defamation and retaliation lawsuit filed by local property owner and advocate Eric Ringsred against the city and the News Tribune.
A back-and-forth legal case that has now spanned 3 years will return to State District Court in Duluth after extensive litigation at every level of the state court system.
The case was once dismissed in its entirety, only to be partially revived by the Court of Appeals. The city further appealed to the Supreme Court, earning a favorable opinion last month that keeps the case intact but significantly reduces the scope of one of Ringsred’s claims.
Ringsred, 72, is best known in recent years for his former ownership and current efforts to prevent the demolition of Pastoret Terrace, the historic downtown property that long housed the Kozy Bar and Apartments before it was ravaged by a series of fires starting in 2010.
His civic advocacy, however, dates back to the late 1990s, when Ringsred first sued the city in an effort to prevent the demolition of buildings to make way for the Technology Village. Other lawsuits quickly followed from the self-described “thorn in the side” of city leaders.
Amid the still-ongoing Pastoret lawsuit that began in 2018, Ringsred initiated a separate defamation and retaliation case against the city and newspaper in April 2020.
The emergency room doctor complained of a decades-long “conspiracy” to undermine his preservation interests and damage his professional reputation, alleging a violation of First Amendment rights.
Ringsred claimed in the suit that officials retaliated against him by denying occupancy of undamaged parts of the Kozy property following its first major fire, refusing to allow him to repurchase the building after he lost it to tax forfeiture in 2015 and failing to provide him a normal level of police at another property he owns.
The fact that Ringsred alleges that the city committed the retaliatory acts over a period of time with the same motive does not allow him to aggregate those discrete acts into a continuing violation of his First Amendment rights.
He also cited a series of alleged false statements, particularly from then-Duluth City Attorney Gunnar Johnson to the News Tribune. Among the statements, Johnson said the building “already was structurally compromised when (the Duluth Economic Development Authority) took ownership” and “all that (building damage) occurred when Eric owned the building.”
Judges Shaun Floerke and David Johnson ultimately dismissed all of the claims on various grounds and denied Ringsred’s request to amend the suit to add several defendants.
But a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals in September 2022 revived the case, saying the district court erred on several counts.
Among other findings, the panel said Ringsred should be allowed to pursue his retaliation claim, which contained allegations dating back to 1998. It typically would be barred by a six-year statute of limitations, but the court reasoned that the time limit should have been tolled, or placed on hold, because it was based on an alleged “continuing violation” or, as Ringsred put it, a “running battle.”
That ruling prompted a further appeal from the city, and garnered the attention of both the League of Minnesota Cities and Minnesota County Attorney’s Association. They warned that the finding was “unprecedented” and would effectively abolish the statute of limitations for civil rights claims against government agencies, opening the floodgates to litigation.
A unanimous state Supreme Court agreed, saying the intermediate appellate court erred.
“Ringsred’s complaint alleges a series of discrete acts of retaliation, each of which would have been actionable when committed,” then-Chief Justice Lorie Gildea wrote. “For example, assuming, as Ringsred alleges, that the city interfered with his ability to buy back his property as retaliation for his prior speech, that conduct was actionable when it was committed. Similarly, if the city’s statements that appeared in the newspapers were retaliatory, Ringsred could have pursued his claims when those statements were published.
“The fact that Ringsred alleges that the city committed the retaliatory acts over a period of time with the same motive does not allow him to aggregate those discrete acts into a continuing violation of his First Amendment rights.”
The high court said Judge Johnson would need to assess “whether Ringsred’s complaint alleges a timely retaliation claim, and if so, resolve that claim on the merits. Under the statute of limitations, the claim could not rely on any conduct that occurred before April 2014.
Under the previous Court of Appeals ruling, Ringsred would be allowed to file a new complaint alleging defamation claims against:
Duluth News Tribune. Forum Communications Co. News Tribune reporter Peter Passi. A First Amendment retaliation claim against the city. Defamation and First Amendment retaliation claims against City Council and DEDA members Zack Filipovich and Roz Randorf. A First Amendment retaliation claim against Mayor Emily Larson.
The newspaper also has challenged the reinstatement of its portion of the case, alleging Ringsred failed to provide timely notice of the appeal. An attorney has said that deprived the defendants of their due process rights.
The Supreme Court did not consider the News Tribune’s challenge, but said a motion to dismiss could be filed on those grounds in district court.
The high court entered its final judgment last week, remanding the case back to Johnson in Duluth. The parties had not filed any new paperwork as of Wednesday.
Ringsred, meanwhile, is awaiting another decision from Judge Eric Hylden in the case that’s currently blocking the potential demolition of the Pastoret.
The city has asked to dismiss the case, asserting there is no ongoing dispute as DEDA is working with consultants to identify alternatives to demolition. But Ringsred and fellow supporters say the case should move forward swiftly, as the compromised structure continues to face “demolition by neglect.”
]]>