Appeals court denies city’s attempt to dismiss defamation lawsuit from fired Minneapolis officer

The Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled Monday that the defamation lawsuit brought against the city of Minneapolis and its police chief by a fired officer can continue, rejecting the city’s claim that the chief’s past public comments were shielded under “absolute privilege.”

Tyler Timberlake, a former Virginia and then Minneapolis officer, sued Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara and the city for defamation and wrongful termination in December 2023. The suit came six months after Timberlake was ousted from the Minneapolis Police Department.

Timberlake’s firing came after public controversy arose from a 2020 use-of-force case where police body camera footage showed him using a stun gun on an unarmed Black man in Virginia, without any apparent provocation.

The incident happened days after the murder of George Floyd, which sparked nationwide protests and calls for reforms on police use-of-force.

The stun gun incident led to protests and criticism of O’Hara, who signed off on Timberlake’s hiring.

Emails obtained by the Star Tribune in 2023 showed the officer had informed the city of the incident during his background check in September 2022, seven months before O’Hara told reporters he had “just learned” about it and was concerned.

In the lawsuit, Timberlake accused O’Hara of making defamatory and false statements in a “panicked effort to evade responsibility.”

In a motion to dismiss the case, the city and O’Hara’s attorneys argued that his role as a top-level executive for the city protected him from the litigation under “absolute privilege,” which gives immunity to some officials from defamation lawsuits regardless of whether a public comment in question is true.

Hennepin County District Judge Karen Janisch ruled last year that she was not convinced this immunity applied to “a non-elected police chief.” The city and O’Hara then took the case to the Court of Appeals to seek a reversal.

In the 14-page opinion released Monday and decided by three Court of Appeals judges, Judge Randall J. Slieter reaffirmed the lower court’s finding that O’Hara was not entitled to “absolute privilege.”

“The Minnesota Supreme Court has never applied absolute privilege to statements made by a city’s chief of police,” Slieter wrote.

In another section of Monday’s opinion, Slieter reversed a District Court finding and said that the city was immune to defamation lawsuits relating to Timberlake’s termination letter.

O’Hara’s attorney Vicki Hruby said in a statement that the chief stands by his argument that he was entitled to the protection of defamation lawsuits in his role.

“Chief O’Hara maintains that he’s entitled to absolute privilege, as any of the public statements at issue made regarding Mr. Timberlake’s hiring and employment arose out of the course and scope of the chief’s job duties to address matters of public concern,” it read.

A statement from the City Attorney’s Office took a similar tone, saying that “recognizing appropriate privileges for government officials’ speech on matters of public concern helps protect the public’s right to know what their government is doing.”

“Our appeal sought to strike the right balance in the public interest,” the statement continued.

Timberlake’s attorney, Joe Tamburino, said in a statement that he is pleased with the latest decision allowing the suit to continue.

“The city and chief created this unnecessary detour to justice,” Tamburino said. “We look forward to proceeding with our case.”

Liz Sawyer and Andy Mannix of the Minnesota Star Tribune contributed to this story.