Orsak v. Metro. Airports Com'n Airport Police
| Decision Date | 14 December 2009 |
| Docket Number | Civil No. 08-5274 (JRT/FLN). |
| Parties | Stephan R. ORSAK, Plaintiff, v. METROPOLITAN AIRPORTS COMMISSION AIRPORT POLICE DEPARTMENT and Officer Brad Wingate, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota |
Philip W. Getts, Law Offices of Philip W. Getts, Minneapolis, MN, for plaintiff.
Timothy R. Schupp and Wendy M. Canaday, Flynn, Gaskins & Bennett, L.L.P., Minneapolis, MN, for defendants.
Plaintiff Stephan R. Orsak was bicycling on the road leading away from the Lindbergh Terminal of the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport when Officer Brad Wingate stopped him. Officer Wingate eventually ordered another officer to deploy a taser against Orsak. Orsak alleges that Officer Wingate, in so doing, used excessive force in violation of Orsak's Fourth Amendment right to be free from unreasonable seizures. Officer Wingate and the Metropolitan Airports Commission (collectively, "defendants"), filed a motion for summary judgment on all counts. (Docket No. 14.) For the reasons stated below, the Court grants the motion in part and denies the motion in part.
At approximately 6:00 pm on September 7, 2006, Stephan Orsak arrived by airplane at the Lindbergh Terminal of the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, retrieved his folding bicycle from the baggage claim area, unfolded it, exited the terminal building, and began to pedal away from the airport along Glumack Drive, as indicated in the following map.
Orsak intended to travel to a location on Glumack Drive where he could gain access to Northwest Drive, a service road that runs parallel to Glumack Drive for several hundred feet and then veers off to the right, to intersect with Post Road. (Id. ¶ 3.) He intended to follow Northwest Drive and Post Road to the bicycle path system in Fort Snelling State Park, and then to ride to his daughter's house in St. Paul. (Id.)
At the time Orsak was riding along Glumack Drive, Officer Orlando Bryant was driving with Officer Brad Wingate in a squad car along the same route. .). They were driving to the airport's Humphrey Terminal to assist in locating a runaway youth. (See Orsak Aff. ¶ 31, Docket No. 25.) Officers Wingate and Bryant observed Orsak bicycling close to the curb and pulled their squad car alongside him. ( At the time of the initial contact, Orsak had traveled approximately 1500 feet from the Lindbergh Terminal.
Officer Wingate testified that due to the heavy motorized vehicle traffic, he was concerned for Orsak's safety and for the safety of motorists traveling along the same road. Officer Wingate rolled down his window and said something that Orsak did not hear clearly, and then Officer Wingate stated, "Get off the road—you can't ride a bicycle there ... you're blocking traffic." Officer Wingate testified that at this time he did not intend to stop the squad car or issue a citation, but simply hoped that Orsak would move over to Northwest Drive, the less-traveled service road running parallel to Glumack Drive.
After hearing Officer Wingate's command to get off the road, Orsak stopped pedaling and coasted to a stop at a location approximately 600 feet from Orsak's initial contact with the squad car. Orsak stopped on the side of the road, and as Orsak was coming to a stop, Officer Wingate asked him why he did not pull off at a previous ramp. (Id. ¶¶ 7-8.) Orsak explained that the ramp was a one-way ramp for vehicles to enter Glumack Drive. (Id. ¶ 8.) Although defendants contend that Orsak cursed and was angry, (, Orsak asserts that at all times during the conversation, he attempted to speak civilly and calmly. (Orsak Aff. ¶ 35, Docket No. 25.) The squad car stopped a short distance ahead of Orsak, and Officer Wingate stepped out. (Id. ¶ 9.)
Orsak contends that when Officer Wingate exited the squad car his demeanor appeared "instantly aggressive and confrontational." .) Officer Wingate yelled, "Get up on the curb or you will be tased or maced." (Orsak Aff. ¶ 9, Docket No. 25.) Orsak responded by pulling his bicycle onto the concrete median between Glumack Drive and Northwest Drive. (Id. ¶ 10.) As he did so, he asked, (Id.) Officer Wingate responded by stating that "[b]icycles are not allowed on [Glumack Drive]." (Id. ¶ 11.)
Orsak indicated that Officer Wingate's statement surprised him, because Orsak had ridden his bicycle along that route on several other occasions without incident, and he had not seen any signs at the Lindbergh Terminal or along Glumack Drive indicating that bicycles were prohibited there. (Id. ¶ 12.) Orsak asked Officer Wingate whether there was a sign posted to state that bicycle traffic was prohibited, and in response Officer Wingate gestured vaguely toward the terminal and stated, "Back there." (Id. ¶¶ 12-13.) In fact, there were no signs along Glumack Drive stating that bicycles were prohibited. ( Orsak asked Officer Wingate for the specific location of the sign, and, according to Orsak, Officer Wingate responded with an angry tone of voice, stating, "Look, I'm telling you, you can't ride your bike here." (Orsak Aff. ¶ 15, Docket No. 25.) Orsak then complained about Officer Wingate's tone of voice, stated that he thought Officer Wingate was being rude, read Officer Wingate's name aloud from his uniform, and requested to speak with Officer Wingate's supervisor. (Id. ¶¶ 16-17.) Officer Wingate began to speak more civilly, and asked Orsak what route he intended to follow. (Id. ¶ 18.)
After Orsak explained his intended route, Officer Wingate responded, (Id. ¶ 20.) Orsak responded, (Id. ¶ 21.) Orsak contends that Officer Wingate responded in a belligerent tone, stating, (Id. ¶ 22.)
Orsak then complained to Officer Wingate about the two contradictory instructions Officer Wingate had given. (Id. ¶ 23.) Orsak explained that even though the initial portion of Northwest Drive was one-way in the opposite direction, it had a suitable narrow lane in which he could ride against oncoming traffic. (Id.)
Officer Wingate then gave Orsak a third instruction, stating, (Id. ¶ 24.) Orsak responded that this was a "ridiculous suggestion" because it would be dangerous for Orsak to walk with his bicycle against traffic along a busy road with no sidewalks and with high concrete curbs. (Id. ¶ 26.) At about this time, Officer Bryant joined Officer Wingate and Orsak on the median. (Id. ¶ 28.)
Officer Wingate then directed Orsak to "[g]et down on [his] knees." (Id. ¶ 27.) Orsak told the officers that he was "dumbfounded by this order" because he had not posed any threat to them. (Id. ¶ 28.) Orsak contends that he repeatedly told the officers that he "would abide by whatever laws applied, but that [he] did not understand why [he] was being treated like a suspected felon or what [he] had done wrong." (Id. ¶ 29.) Officer Wingate did not repeat the order for Orsak to get on his knees but instead told Orsak that he and Officer Bryant had been on their way to the Humphrey Terminal to help look for a runaway youth and that Orsak was wasting their time. (Id. ¶ 31.) Orsak agreed that the encounter was a waste of time and offered to follow Officer Wingate's first suggestion and ride his bicycle along Northwest Drive to Post Road, as Orsak had originally intended. (Id. ¶¶ 32-33.) Orsak stated, "The best thing is I simply go along this service road and you get to your stop." .) Orsak contends, contrary to the officers' allegations, that the officers voiced no objection, and Orsak mounted his bicycle. As Orsak placed his feet on the pedals, he told the officers, without animus or hostility, "I'm going to wish you both a good evening and hope the rest of it goes better than this has gone." .) Defendants allege that Officer Wingate ordered Orsak to stop multiple times, but Orsak denies that they issued any such orders at the time Orsak initiated his departure. (
As Orsak began pedaling and after he had traveled no more than three feet, Officer Wingate grabbed Orsak by one shoulder and by his backpack, pulled him off the bicycle, spun him around, and threw him to the ground. (Orsak Aff. ¶ 37, Docket No. 25.) Orsak's glasses flew off, he fell forward, and his face hit the concrete median. (Id. ¶¶ 38-39.) Defendants deny that Officer Wingate threw Orsak to the ground. ( Orsak contends that as a result of the impact, his helmet cracked and he suffered abrasions on his face and left arm. (Orsak Aff. ¶¶ 38-39, Docket No. 25.) According to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Baker v. Union Twp.
...with handcuffs and restraints, was violation of clearly established law, as of August 2006) ; Orsak [v. Metro. Airports Comm'n Airport Police Dep't], 675 F. Supp. 2d 944 [(D. Minn. 2009)] (holding that officers who pulled cyclist from bike, stood him up, and shot him with taser may have vio......
-
Bryan v. Macpherson
...described by other courts as ‘moderate, non-lethal force’ ” and cause “acute—even severe—physical pain”); Orsak v. Metro. Airports Comm'n, 675 F.Supp.2d 944, 957–59 (D.Minn.2009); Cyrus v. Town of Mukwonago, 2009 WL 1110413, at *21 (E.D.Wis. April 24, 2009) (“The Court will view the use of ......
-
Browning ex rel. C.S. v. Edmonson Cnty.
...with handcuffs and restraints, was violation of clearly established law, as of August 2006); [ Orsak v. Metro. Airports Comm. Airport Police Dept. , 675 F. Supp. 2d 944, 944 (D. Minn. 2009) ] (holding that officers who pulled cyclist from bike, stood him up, and shot him with taser may have......
-
Williams v. City of Cleveland
...a gurney with handcuffs and restraints, was violation of clearly established law, as of August 2006); Orsak v. Metro. Airports Comm. Airport Police Dep't, 675 F.Supp.2d 944 (D.Minn. 2009) (holding thatofficers who pulled cyclist from bike, stood him up, and shot him with taser may have viol......