"Prosecutor Ryder Sues Witnesses After Beating, False Charges"
Item: Civil Complaint Gary Ryder vs. Arnie Hove, Clint Mullen. et al.
Date: Filed September 12, 1995, Richland County, Montana District Court





RICHARD A. SIMONTON



SIMONTON, HOWE & SCHNEIDER, P.C.



122 W. Bell



P. 0. Box 1250



Glendive, Montana 59330



Telephone: (406) 365-8274



Facsimile: (406) 365-8277



Attorneys for Plaintiff















     MONTANA SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, RICHLAND COUNTY



*****************************************************************







GARY RYDER,                                     NO. DV-95-098                                                                                    



     Plaintiff,







VS.                                         C O M P L A I N T       



                                                   



ARNIE HOVE, DENNIS HERMAN,



CLINT MULLIN, JR., RENA MULLIN,



and JOHN DOE,



     Defendants.



*****************************************************************



     Plaintiff complains' of Defendants and alleges:







                                I.







     Plaintiff is an Attorney duly licensed to practice Law in



the State of Montana.







                               II.







     Defendant HOVE is an Attorney duly licensed to practice Law



in the State of Montana and until 1994 he collectively



represented the Defendants HERMAN and MULLIN











                               III.







     Between January, 1991 and February, 1995, Plaintiff served



as a parttime Deputy County Attorney for Richland County, Montana



and in addition maintained a private law practice.







                               IV.







     In the course of his employment as a Deputy County Attorney



Plaintiff was required, among other responsibilities, to provide



legal advice to Richland County officials and to prosecute



individuals charged with committing crimes in Richland County,



Montana. In his position as Deputy County Attorney it is



imperative that the Plaintiff have the confidence of the public



and Richland County officials.







                                V.







     In his capacity as a private Attorney it is imperative that



the Plaintiff have the confidence and respect of the public as



potential clients.







                                VI.







     That September 12, 1993 there was a fight near the Triangle



Club in Richland County, Montana involving Defendants MULLINS and



HERMAN.







                               VII.







That at all times material hereto Defendant HOVE was McCone



County Attorney with special knowledge of criminal matters.



                             



                              VIII.







     Prior to September 12, 1993, the Plaintiff had represented



various individuals or entities in matters involving Defendants



MULLINS and HERMAN.







                               IX.







      That the conduct of the Defendants as described herein



resulted in the Plaintiff's resignation of his employment with



Richland County, Montana as a Deputy County Attorney, and the



closure of his Law practice in. Richland county, Montana because



of the embarrassment caused him by the Defendants, comments made



to and about him, and what he perceived to be a lack of



confidence from members of the public and County Officials.







                                X.







     JOHN DOE is a Defendant who has participated in the



publication, of false and unprivileged statements about the



Plaintiff, and whose identity may become known through discovery.



                     FIRST CLAIM (DEFAMATION)







                                XI.







     Plaintiff repeats the allegations of Paragraphs 1. through



X.







                               XII.







     August 30, 1993 a proposed Complaint together with a letter



were delivered to Sidney and Richland County officials alleging



the Plaintiff as well as others were guilty of Civil Rights



Violations involving the Defendants.







                               XIII.







     September 14, 1993, Defendant HOVE directed a letter to the



Richland County Clerk and Recorder to be brought to the attention



of the Richland County Commissioners and to the Sidney Town Clerk



to be brought to the attention of the City council alleging in



part as follows:







     "On Sunday morning September 12, 1993 Mr.



     Ryder and individuals in his company



     ... numbering approximately 25 to 30 attacked



     Clint Mullin Jr. , Rena Mullin and Dennis



     Herman. It was clear to the individuals



     present that Mr. Ryder had orchestrated the



     beating of my clients."







Enclosed with that Notice were copies of Statements given to Law



Enforcement authorities as well as a video tape believed to have



been taken in Defendant HOVE'S office. That the video



orchestrated by Defendant HOVE, the MULLINS and HERMAN was then



sent to Richland County Law Enforcement after September 12, 1993



together with writings from Defendant HOVE.







                               XIV.







     Defendant HOVE notified the Billings Gazette about the



September 12, 1993 incident for purposes of reporting it



including the allegation that Mr. Ryder orchestrated the beating



of Defendants MULLINS and HERMAN.







                                XV.







     Defendant HOVE notified the Montana Attorney Generals



Office either orally, in writing, or both contending that the



Plaintiff organized the fight and that the contact with the



Attorney Generals Office was after September 12, 1993.







                               XVI.







     Defendants MULLINS and HERRAN gave Statements orally 



and in writing, to Law Enforcement authorities after September 



12, 1993 indicating that Plaintiff was involved in or orchestrated their beating.







                               XVII.







     That September 15, 1993 Defendant HOVE wrote to the 



Richland County Attorney who is the Plaintiff's supervisor and 



under whom the Plaintiff works and to whom he is responsible, 



indicating that the Plaintiff was responsible for an attack and 



beating on Defendants, MULLINS and HERMAN.







                              XVIII.







     All of the above Statements attributed to the Defendants were 



false and unprivileged publications by writing and/or orally which 



exposed the Plaintiff to hatred, contempt or ridicule or obloquy or 



which caused him to be shunned or avoided or which had a 



tendency to injure him in his occupation as a lawyer.  The false 



and unprivileged statements by the Defendants accused him of 



criminal activity and tended to directly injure him in respect to 



his office and profession by imputing to him general disqualifications 



in those respects which the office and his profession peculiarly 



require.







                               XIX.







     That Law Enforcement and the Montana Attorney Generals 



Office investigated the above allegations made by the Defendants 



and did not prosecute the Plaintiff even though those Officials 



were urged to do so by these Defendants.







                                XX.







     The above described conduct of the Defendants as directed



a towards the Plaintiff was done maliciously and with reckless



disregard of the truth and consequences.



                 SECOND CLAIM (ABUSE OF PROCESS)







                               XXI.







     The Plaintiff repeats the allegations of Paragraphs 1.



through X.







                               XXII.







     After September 12, 1993, the Defendants, HOVE and CLINT



MULLIN, JR. acting in concert with each other, complained to



Richland County Law Enforcement about Plaintiff orchestrating the



September 12, .1993 fight and they caused a criminal investigation 



to be initiated against the Plaintiff.







                              XXIII.







     That the Defendants HOVE and CLINT MULLIN, JR. acting



together initiated a demand to Sidney and Richland County



authorities for money based on the false statements that they had



made surrounding the September 12, 1993 incident.







                               XXIV.







That the initiation of the criminal investigation and the



filing of the claim with City and County authorities was done



with ulterior motives, i.e. to remove the Plaintiff from his



involvement in various legal matters involving the Defendants.







                               XXV.







     That the complaints of the Defendants HOVE and CLINT MULLIN,



JR. to Law Enforcement about the Plaintiff and the Notice and



Demand to City and County Officials were willful acts having no



foundation or basis.







     As a result of the above described behavior of the



Defendants, the Plaintiff has sustained special and general



damages.







     WHEREFORE Plaintiff prays as follows against the Defendants



jointly and severally:







     1) For Special Damages, including reduction in salary,



moving expenses and decreased income from his Law Practice.







     2) For General Damages to be determined by the trier of



fact.







     3) For. Punitive Damages resulting from the willful and



malicious conduct of the Defendants.







     4) For such other and further relief as the Court deems



just and proper.











                                 RICHARD A. SIMONTON



                                 Attorney for Plaintiff








Click Here
We can create a presence for you or your organization at an extremely reasonable price.
Find out how you can promote your Web Pages with a display advertisement on this Site.

Click here
To subscribe free to our e-mail list

Back to Free Speech Newspaper Home Page


Free Speech Newspaper
18631 North 19th Avenue
Suite 128-200
Phoenix, Arizona 85027
BUS (602) 587-9604 FAX (602) 587-9628


Click here for email

total visitors entering all pages since January 25, 1996


(C) 1996 Free Speech