5 F. Supp. 3d 1036
S.D. Iowa2013Background
- Phelps (Margie, Elizabeth, Timothy) challenged three Iowa statutes related to flag abuse as unconstitutional and sought declaratory relief, injunctive relief (abandoning a temporary injunction), and attorney fees.
- Ralph O’Donnell, named a respondent, answered and filed counterclaims against Phelps et al. for abuse of process, defamation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED), alleging they wrongfully named him and publicized the suit.
- Phelps et al. moved to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), arguing the counterclaims fail the Twombly/Iqbal pleading standard.
- The court excluded extraneous exhibits submitted with O’Donnell’s brief (declining to convert the motion to summary judgment) and assessed the sufficiency of the pleaded facts only.
- Court dismissed the abuse-of-process and IIED counterclaims for failure to plead the required elements (improper/ulterior purpose for abuse of process; outrageous conduct and severe distress for IIED).
- The court found the defamation claim insufficiently pleaded (no speaker, content, recipients, or specific damages) but granted leave to amend the defamation counterclaim by a set deadline.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (O’Donnell) | Defendant's Argument (Phelps et al.) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abuse of process — improper purpose element | Phelps named him to add police chiefs from multiple counties, seek class status, and obtain broad injunctions; seeking fees pressures him to pay another debt | No allegation of an ulterior/ improper purpose or extortion; naming officials or seeking fees is not improper use of process | Dismissed: Plaintiff failed to plead a plausible ulterior purpose required for abuse of process |
| IIED — outrageous conduct & severe distress | Filing a meritless suit and publicizing it caused emotional distress; discovery materials (excluded) show many allegations were untrue | Conduct is not "outrageous" as required; alleged emotional distress is not pleaded with the severity Iowa requires | Dismissed: Pleading insufficient to show outrageous conduct or severe emotional distress |
| Defamation — identification, falsity, publication, damages | Press release/press conference publicized false allegations; actionable statements existed | Statements in the complaint are privileged; alleged publicity not pleaded with content, speaker, recipients, or damages | Not dismissed with prejudice: Claim inadequately pleaded; court allows amendment by deadline to cure specificity defects |
| 12(b)(6) / Pleading sufficiency standard | (Implicit) O’Donnell contends facts suffice | Phelps argues Twombly/Iqbal requires more than labels/conclusions | Court applied Twombly/Iqbal: accepted factual allegations but dismissed claims lacking factual plausibility; defamation allowed leave to amend |
Key Cases Cited
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (plausibility standard for pleadings)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (two-pronged test for evaluating pleadings under Rule 12(b)(6))
- Fuller v. Local Union No. 106 of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters, 567 N.W.2d 419 (Iowa 1997) (elements of abuse of process and IIED under Iowa law)
- Reis v. Walker, 491 F.3d 868 (8th Cir. 2007) (abuse-of-process often requires extortionate ulterior purpose)
- Braden v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 588 F.3d 585 (8th Cir. 2009) (pleading must be construed as a whole; plausibility standard applied)
- Palmer v. Tandem Mgmt. Servs., 505 N.W.2d 813 (Iowa 1993) (very restrictive view of improper purpose for abuse of process)
- Kiesau v. Bantz, 686 N.W.2d 164 (Iowa 2004) (elements and societal purpose of defamation tort)
- Freeman v. Bechtel Const. Co., 87 F.3d 1029 (8th Cir. 1996) (defamation pleadings require identification of statements and publication to non-privileged recipients)