Posts tagged Michael Brodkorb

Attorney: MacDonald’s lawsuit is ‘frivolous and vexatious’

Michelle MacDonald has filed a “frivolous and vexatious” lawsuit, which appears to be in violation of an Order of the Minnesota Supreme Court which details the conditions by which MacDonald is allowed to practice law, according to an attorney for Missing in Minnesota and Michael Brodkorb.

Nathan M. Hansen (above left), served MacDonald and her supervising attorney, Larry A, Frost, a Rule 11 Motion for Sanctions this afternoon in response to MacDonald’s lawsuit filed last week in Dakota County.

“The safeguards set forth in the Order of the Minnesota Supreme Court relating to her practice of law have been ignored by Ms. MacDonald and her cohorts,” wrote Hansen.

Larry Frost, MacDonald’s supervising attorney.

As detailed in Hansen’s Memorandum of Law, “[p]laintiffs have wholly failed to articulate any claim in their complaint that would cause this court to rule in their favor. As such, the complaint should be dismissed with prejudice and without further litigation.”

MacDonald and Frost have been given 21 days to withdraw the lawsuit “with prejudice” or the Rule 11 Motion for Sanctions will be filed with the court.

MacDonald’s lawsuit may violate an order from Minnesota Supreme Court

The Minnesota Supreme Court suspended MacDonald’s law license for 60 days earlier this year and she remains on probation for two years in response to an attorney complaint filed against MacDonald in August 2016.

The conditions of MacDonald’s two-year probation included that she will be supervised by an attorney appointed by the Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility.

MacDonald is prohibited from engaging in “the solo practice of law,” and she must “work in a setting where she is in daily contact with, and under the direct supervision of another Minnesota licensed attorney.”

Hansen noted, “[i]t appears that the Order of the Minnesota Supreme Court was written in such a way so as to prevent cases like the instant case from being initiated by Ms. MacDonald.”

Despite MacDonald’s claims, Eagan police said booking photo was “valid”

Booking photo from MacDonald’s arrest on September 12, 2013.

In her lawsuit, MacDonald claimed she filed a police report against Brodkorb on May 24 and June 11, 2018, regarding a booking photo published on Missing in Minnesota.

MacDonald is suing in part over the publication of the booking photo from her arrest during a court hearing involving Sandra Grazzini-Rucki on September 12, 2013.

In response to a public data request, the Eagan Police Department provided a police report from May 24, 2018, but they could not find a report filed by MacDonald on  June 11, 2018.

According to the police report from May 24, 2018, provided by the Eagan Police Department, MacDonald told police that Brodkorb took a picture of MacDonald in public, doctored it to look like a mugshot and uploaded it to a mugshot website.

The Eagan Police Department investigated MacDonald’s claims and found them unfounded. The report states: “the photo turned out to be a valid public booking photo.”

Please follow Missing in Minnesota on Twitter and Facebook for updates on MacDonald’s lawsuit.

Allison Mann contributed to this story.

MacDonald sues Michael Brodkorb and Missing in Minnesota

Michelle MacDonald served a lawsuit today on Michael Brodkorb, and Missing in Minnesota, alleging defamation, defamation per se, and defamation by implication.

MacDonald is suing in part over the publication of a booking photo from her arrest during a court hearing involving Sandra Grazzini-Rucki on September 12, 2013, as well as our reporting that she was labeled a “person of interest” by the Lakeville Police Department in the disappearance of Samantha and Gianna Rucki.

Missing in Minnesota has been threatened with legal action since 2016 by MacDonald over the use of her public booking from her arrest. In her own book, MacDonald acknowledged that law enforcement considered her a “person of interest” in the disappearance of the Rucki sisters.

Both Brodkorb and Missing in Minnesota will vigorously defend themselves in this legal action.

Below is a copy of the lawsuit served on Brodkorb and Missing and Minnesota earlier today.

Oops: Another fake news story from Grazzini-Rucki supporter retracted

An online story published by a key supporter of Sandra Grazzini-Rucki which made false and misleading claims about jury tampering during Grazzini-Rucki’s criminal trial was taken down by the media outlet after being contacted by Missing in Minnesota about the inaccurate facts contained in the story.

The inaccurate story was published by Michael Volpe for Communities Digital News last Thursday, but the story was later edited with multiple corrections by Jacquie Kubin, President of Communities Digital News, and then republished. Continue reading

Missing in Minnesota announces addition of Allison Mann

Missing in Minnesota announced today the addition of Allison Mann as a contributing author. Mann will also provide strategic direction as Missing in Minnesota transitions from an online format to additional mediums yet to be announced.

“Allison has a sharp legal mind, and passionate commitment to help tell this important story,” said Michael Brodkorb, who’s reporting on this story began with the Star Tribune in 2015.

Brodkorb later founded Missing in Minnesota in July 2016, which provides detailed news, analysis, and commentary on the continuing developments involving this case.

Mann is a paralegal with Elliott Law Offices and lives in Lakeville, Minnesota with her husband and family.

Elliott Law Offices provides legal services to David Rucki and his family, but Elliott Law Offices is not affiliated with Missing in Minnesota.

“Two kids disappeared in Minnesota for 944 days,” said Mann, who added, “as a mother and a paralegal, I can’t help but see the importance of sharing the story of how and why it happened.”

Missing in Minnesota is the true story of about the disappearance of Samantha and Gianna Rucki, who vanished from Lakeville, Minnesota on April 19, 2013, during a custody and divorce proceeding involving their parents.

The sisters were taken by their mother in violation of a court order. The girls’ father, David Rucki, kept searching for his missing daughters for 944 days, until they were found by law enforcement on November 18, 2015.

David Rucki, was awarded full custody of all five of his children in November 2013, while two of his daughters remained missing. Rucki was reunited with his daughters days after they were found and they live with him at the family’s home in Lakeville.

Grazzini-Rucki released from jail, Rucki family concerned for their safety

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki was released from jail early this morning, finishing the first portion of her jail sentence which will continue over the next six years. But just hours after being released from jail today, Grazzini-Rucki wasted no time to start engaging in bizarre and threatening behavior.

As I left the Dakota County Northern Service Center in West St. Paul this morning around 8:15 AM, I was shocked to find Grazzini-Rucki standing by my car, taking notes.  I got into my car to leave, but Grazzini-Rucki then walked around to the back of my car and continued to take more notes. I stepped out of my car, as Grazzini-Rucki was blocking my car and asked her, “can I help you with something?” Grazzini-Rucki said no and she walked back to a waiting vehicle.

Confusion over Grazzini-Rucki’s release from jail

The tentative release date for Grazzini-Rucki’s release from jail was today, but the Victim Information Notification Everyday (VINE) system failed to send an alert that Grazzini-Rucki had been released. The online inmate search for Dakota County incorrectly listed Grazzini-Rucki as an inmate this morning even hours after she had been released from jail.

This is why I was so shocked to see Grazzini-Rucki standing by my car this morning, as I had not received a VINE alert announced Grazzini-Rucki had been released, and Dakota County still listed Grazzini-Rucki as an inmate on their website.

The VINE alert announcing that Grazzini-Rucki had been released from jail was not sent out until 10:57AM, 4 hours after Grazzini-Rucki left jail.  The Dakota County Sheriff’s Office said this morning that a “glitch” delayed the public notification of her release from jail.

Rucki family concerned for their safety

In July, Grazzini-Rucki was found guilty on six counts of deprivation of parental rights for her role in the disappearance of her daughters, Samantha and Gianna Rucki. The sisters ran from their home on April 19, 2013 during a custody and divorce proceeding involving their parents.

The girls’ father, David Rucki, was awarded full custody of all five of his children in November 2013, while two of his daughters remained missing.

Continue reading

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki to file another harassment restraining order

Sandra Grazzini-Rucki intends on filing another fraudulent harassment restraining order against me when she is released from jail within the next two weeks, according to statements made by her attorney Michelle MacDonald to members of the media, and based on information communicated by MacDonald to my attorneys.

Last month, a Dakota County Deputy Sheriff served me with a harassment restraining order that was granted by Judge John McBride in Washington County at the request of Grazzini-Rucki.

Judge McBride later vacated and dismissed the same harassment restraining order.

The order was dismissed for procedural reasons; Grazzini-Rucki used the Stillwater office address of MacDonald to claim she was a resident of Washington County. Judge McBride agreed with the arguments made by my attorneys, Nathan Hansen and Ryan Griffin, that Grazzini-Rucki failed to file her request for a harassment restraining order in the proper county and therefore, Judge McBride vacated and dismissed the order.

Because the harassment restraining order was dismissed for procedural reason, Grazzini-Rucki has the option of filing the same fraudulent request for a harassment restraining order in another county in Minnesota when she is released from jail, which she intends to do.

While I am happy the harassment restraining order was vacated and dismissed, the court did not examine the allegations made by Grazzini-Rucki in her original request for the harassment order.

Continue reading