Defamation lawsuit against Minneapolis Police Chief O’Hara will continue after court ruling

The Minnesota Court of Appeals returned a split opinion in the ongoing defamation case involving the City of Minneapolis, Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara, and a former Minneapolis Police Department (MPD) officer.

In March of 2022, Tyler Timberlake was acquitted of three misdemeanor assault and battery charges that stemmed from a 2020 use-of-force incident when he was with the Fairfax County Police Department (FCPD). That incident involved an unarmed black man and occurred less than two weeks after George Floyd died.

After his acquittal, Timberlake was reinstated with the FCPD but chose to apply to the MPD. He was officially sworn in as an MPD officer in March of 2023. Just one month later, media reports about the 2020 incident emerged and MPD subsequently fired Timberlake in July of that year.

When those media reports were published, Chief O’Hara issued a statement that indicated he was not aware of the use-of-force incident, was “extremely concerned” upon learning about Timberlake’s history, and the situation would be investigated.

In response, Timberlake filed a defamation lawsuit against the City of Minneapolis and O’Hara in December of 2023. The officer also sued the city for wrongful termination in the same legal filing, but that count was later dismissed by the court.

In his lawsuit, Timberlake said he fully disclosed the 2020 use-of-force incident throughout the application process and spoke with O’Hara directly about the incident during his final interview. Timberlake alleged that O’Hara communicated that he did not care about the incident and there would be no problems from him as long as Timberlake met standards.

Timberlake said O’Hara’s statements were defamatory because they stated or implied that the former FCPD officer concealed the 2020 incident during his application process and falsely claimed Timberlake was not qualified to be an officer.

According to the lawsuit, Timberlake “finds himself with no job, no prospect of getting a job in the field of law enforcement, and his reputation in tatters. He seeks to recover money damages from the people who made that happen.”

Now, that lawsuit is progressing through the Hennepin County courts. In April of 2024, the city and O’Hara filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. That motion was partially accepted by the district court, but the defamation portion was allowed to continue. Despite this, O’Hara and the city filed an appeal which sought to have the defamation claims thrown out.

On Monday, the Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court’s ruling which said O’Hara cannot claim his speech was protected by absolute privilege. As such, Timberlake will be able to pursue defamation claims against O’Hara.

A legal doctrine protecting certain forms of speech, absolute privilege allows an individual to say whatever they want without fear of liability even if those statements are knowingly false and produced with malice. In the context of public officials, the Minnesota Supreme Court has ruled that absolute privilege only applies to statements made by high-ranking officials in the course of their duties.

In their ruling, the Court of Appeals said absolute privilege has never been extended to a chief of police and affirmed that O’Hara cannot claim his statements were protected by absolute privilege.

However, the Court of Appeals reversed a portion of the lower court’s ruling which said that statements from a termination letter to Timberlake are protected by statutory immunity.

In the defamation lawsuit, Timberlake said he received a letter months after he was fired that explained the reason for his termination. According to Timberlake, the letter contained a memorandum from O’Hara which falsely characterized the 2020 incident and said Timberlake’s conduct in that incident “would have violated MPD Policy.”

State law allows employees who are involuntarily terminated to request a letter explaining the reasons for their termination. The law also says the request must be fulfilled within 10 working days and the contents of that letter cannot be used in defamation litigation.

Since Timberlake reportedly received the letter months after requesting it, his legal team argued that the immunity clause in state law no longer applied due to untimeliness. Despite this, the Court of Appeals disagreed and reversed the lower court’s decision, thus ruling that the termination letter cannot be used as a means to seek damages for defamation.

As such, O’Hara and Minneapolis’ arguments were affirmed in part and rejected in part. The case has now been remanded to the lower court and will continue to progress.

Alpha News reached out to attorneys for Timberlake and O’Hara for this story but did not receive a response.

Meanwhile, the Minneapolis City Attorney’s office told Alpha News: “Our appeal sought to strike the right balance in the public interest. We are reviewing the opinion.”

The post Defamation lawsuit against Minneapolis Police Chief O’Hara will continue after court ruling appeared first on Alpha News MN.