http://www.thehawkeye.com/Story/DOT-assault-lawsuit-011410

S.D. trucker’s IDOT suit dismissed
Judge says officer cannot be held personally liable.

By JOHN MANGALONZO

jmangalonzo@thehawkeye.com

MOUNT PLEASANT — David Howard sounded distraught Wednesday when he learned over the phone that his Henry County District Court lawsuit was dismissed.

The 71-year-old Sioux Falls, S.D., man filed the lawsuit last year against an Iowa Department of Transportation vehicle enforcement officer. Howard maintains he was pistol-whipped by DOT officer Darrell Wiegand Jr. of Burlington during a traffic stop nearly five years ago.

Wiegand is the same officer a Fort Madison couple alleged harassed and menaced them during a traffic stop earlier last year.

“I guess they are going to get away with one,” Howard said. “I kind of expected the state to do it.”

The suit named the officer as the primary defendant on negligence and assault and battery, stating Wiegand “did physically strike the plaintiff in the head and back.” DOT also was named for alleged negligence.

Howard and his wife sought for judgment in the amount that is fair “plus interest.”

“This court finds that it can decide the motion to dismiss on purely legal grounds,” District Court Judge Michael Schilling said in his ruling. “This is one of the exceptional cases where a motion to dismiss should be granted.”

Assistant Attorney General Robin Glenn Formaker long has contended some of Howard’s claims are barred “by the immunity for claims arising out of alleged assault and battery.”

Chapter 669 of the Iowa Tort Claims Act gives citizens a road map of sorts by which they can sue the state. Attorneys for the state argued Howard cannot sue Wiegand and IDOT “because employees of governmental agencies acting within the scope of their employment and the individual state agencies are immune from suit” under that section.

Under the Tort Act, a suit cannot be filed against the state if it is based on “any claim arising out of assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, libel, slander, misrepresentation, deceit, or interference with contract rights.”

“Thus, defendants’ assert that plaintiff’s suit for an alleged assault by an employee of a state agency must fail,” Schilling wrote.

Howard said he was lost during a delivery in Mount Pleasant nearly five years ago and was going to ask Wiegand for directions.

He claimed Wiegand became agitated, jumped from his patrol car and told Howard he was under arrest for being on a street where semitrailers were not allowed.

Howard alleges Wiegand pulled out his service handgun and repeatedly hit him. He said someone, a trucker’s wife, caught the scene on a video camera.

Howard was taken to jail and released the next day.

Wiegand, according to DOT documents, insisted Howard was uncooperative. There was no mention of a struggle in the officer’s report.

Schilling, in the ruling, said after a “plain, simple and unambiguous reading” of the Tort Claim Act section that applied to the case, the assault and battery claim “must be dismissed.”

The judge added: “Darrell D. Wiegand Jr., as an employee of the state, cannot be held personally liable for any claim which is exempted,” under that Tort Claim Act section.

Earlier last year, Jane and Carl Schneider of Fort Madison accused Wiegand of conducting an illegal traffic stop on their vehicle after the officer mistook them for carnival workers and allegedly treated them like common criminals.

When they heard of Howard’s lawsuit, the Schneiders established a legal fund for the South Dakota man and netted more than $11,000.

For now, Howard is considering whether to appeal.

“The big thing right now is an attorney who will stick with it, who has guts,” he said. “It isn’t right, what (Wiegand) got away by with.”

Mr Howard says that since receiving repeated blows to his head, back, and shoulders  four years ago, he has incurred over $40, 000 in medical bills and has had repeated severe headaches which he never experienced  before meeting  Officer Wiegand.

In addition, now that he is bringing IDOT and Officer Wiegand to court, Mr. Howard and his wife have many  additional expenses such as attorney and court fees.

Let’s help out this brave  gentleman who is standing up for the  rights of us all by confronting a law enforcement  officer and a  government agency who seem to believe they are  indomitable and can do whatever they please. Not to mention that in this regard,  IDOT appears to have the full support of Iowa Ombudsman and Governor Culver, neither of whom has chosen to rein in the officer or the agency.

For further information, e-mail gyrocarl@gmail.com

Meanwhile, checks made out to David Howard may be sent to

Friends of David Howard

P.O. Box 204

Ft. Madison  IOWA

52627

http://www.thehawkeye.com/Story/Wiegand-assualt-080409

http://www.thehawkeye.com/Story/IDOT-081309

After Mr. Howard was stopped on a deadend street by Iowa DOT Officer Darrell Wiegand, the incident quickly escalated into a serious situation from which Mr. Howard emerged with severe head injuries that have affected his health and wellbeing ever since.The actions of Officer Wiegand were observed by several other truckers who were parked nearby, and even captured on videotape.

Officer Wiegand took Mr. Howard to jail for insulting a law enforcement officer but in the morning when Mr. Howard appeared in court the judge took one look at him and dismissed the charges. Later, Mr. Howard registered a complaint with IDOT officials who met with him at his home to conduct an “investigation.” Mr. Howard described to them what had happened and they thanked him for his help. Then they went away and he never heard from them again.

Mr. Howard hired a lawyer and tried to take Officer Wiegand and IDOT to court in Mt. Pleasant but the Henry County Attorney refused to hear his case. After this, Mr. Howard lived with pain and humiliation for a long time, so long in fact that this past summer he needed to refile his case due to time limitations or give it up for good.

That was when his attorney forwarded him a number of newspaper articles in which a Fort Madison couple claimed in March 2009 to have been harassed and menaced by this very same officer Darrell Wiegand, and to David Howard it all sounded all too familiar. http://www.thehawkeye.com/Story/IDOT-controversy-04

The Schneiders of Fort Madison also had lodged a complaint with IDOT against Officer Wiegand. In April 2009, they too had IDOT officials come to their home and talk about the “investigation” they were engaged in. And even though during the time the officials were visiting, the Schneiders’ phone actually rang several times with calls from people who had similarly disturbing stories about Officer Wiegand, the officials maintained that Officer Wiegand had had no previous complaints against him! Then in August when the Schneiders learned what had happened to David Howard, the only possible conclusion to be reached was that IDOT officials, Iowa Ombudsman, and Governor Culver (all of whom had been apprised of the Schneiders’ complaint) weren’t telling the truth.

In fact, the Schneiders and David Howard have received a runaround from the state of Iowa. According to the state, the “investigations” of Officer Wiegand’s behavior by Iowa DOT, Iowa Ombudsman, and the governor’s office must by law remain confidential. Citing a law pertaining to personnel records, officials have repeatedly refused to reveal a shred of information that would give anybody confidence they have been dealing with the actions of this officer in a manner that protects the safety of the citizens of Iowa.

All the state would acknowledge in the Schneiders’ situation was that Officer Wiegand was put on paid administrative leave and subsequently reinstated. In addition, Iowa DOT Director Nancy Richardson appeared disaffected and dismissive of the Schneiders’ complaint, while an Iowa Ombudsman representative reportedly laughed behind their backs that they might be so foolish as to think they had a case. It was also reportedly suggested that Mr. Howard didn’t have a case for Iowa Ombudsman to pursue because his version of what happened was not the same as Officer Wiegand’s! Lastly, Governor Culver was not the least forthcoming: he did not have the courtesy to personally answer the Schneiders’ letter of concern.

Such is the current state of corruption in Iowa. In total disregard for transparency and accountability, not to mention citizens’ safety, the Iowa Attorney General now wants to dismiss Mr. Howard’s lawsuit .

http://www.thehawkeye.com/Story/IDOT-090509

http://www.kcrg.com/news/local/57574597.html

David Howard deserves better than this. He deserves to have his case heard and to receive some compensation for all that he has been through. And Iowa citizens also deserve to have this case heard because it is clear that at least one law enforcement officer and several of our government agencies have become so arrogant they believe their power is unassailable.

The Friends of David Howard humbly ask for your help in the form of donations for Mr. Howard’s medical bills (over $40,00 to date ) and also attorney and court fees (which are fast piling up.) Now seventy- one, Mr. Howard is still behind the wheel of his semi much of the time, although his wife Mary Ann’s recent surgery has curtailed his hours somewhat of late.

You may send contributions in David Howard’s name to:

FRIENDS OF DAVID HOWARD

P.O. Box 204

Fort Madison, Iowa 52627

Remember that by making a donation you will not only be supporting Mr. Howard but also taking a step towards curbing an apparently rogue officer and more than one government agency which sadly seem to be spinning out of control.