A federal judge ruled this month that a Fairbanks man’s civil rights lawsuit against nine state law enforcement officers can continue uninterrupted. That’s after Alaska District Court Judge H. Russell Holland denied a motion from the Alaska Department of Law, which had sought to stay proceedings in the excessive force case.
The state’s failed motion cited a lawsuit in state court involving the same plaintiff. In that case, the state’s law department is currently seeking to claw back $500,000 in settlement money it paid to 59-year-old Philip Wrobel over the summer.
The civil complaints in both the federal and state court are tied to the same incident. Wrobel, the plaintiff, says that in October 2023, law enforcement used unnecessary SWAT-style tactics when transporting him for an evaluation while he was in the middle of a mental health crisis. The complaints say those tactics violated rights guaranteed under both the Alaska and U.S. Constitutions to be “free from illegal and unreasonable seizures by use of excessive force.”
An Alaska State Troopers dispatch issued after the October 2023 incident says the Special Emergency Reaction Team responded because of “prior statements made by the individual.” The dispatch also describes the special team as “successfully” taking the individual into custody and transporting him to the hospital.
According to the lawsuits, though, the group of officers recklessly escalated force when they tased, beat, pepper-sprayed and shot less-lethal rounds at Wrobel, seriously injuring him and causing damage to his home.
Photos of Wrobel, who was not charged with a crime, show him with bloodied eyes and bruising from head to chest following the incident. Heidi Wrobel, Philip Wrobel’s wife, said in an interview earlier this year that her husband suffered a fractured eye socket and fractured jaw.
Wrobel first sued unidentified Troopers as well as the Alaska Department of Public Safety in September 2024 in Fairbanks Superior Court. In addition to excessive force claims, the plaintiff also argued the public safety department inadequately trained officers and had outdated procedures that discriminate against people with mental illnesses. Nine officers were later named in an amended complaint but never officially made party to that case, and it concluded this July after a $500,000 settlement agreement.
But the parties were at odds about exactly which claims that agreement resolved, and now, the state superior court case is reopened and the settlement in question. The state law department filed a motion for relief from judgment last month, trying to get money back from Wrobel and accusing the plaintiff of “fraudulent misrepresentation” when accepting the settlement offer.
Heidi Wrobel declined to comment for this story, requesting that questions about some of the developments in the case be directed to attorneys. Jeff Barber, one of the attorneys representing Wrobel, told KUAC he hasn’t experienced a dispute of this nature in his more than two decades practicing law. He said, in his opinion, the state’s attempt to undo the agreement is “outrageous.”
“I’m working on behalf of Mr. Wrobel, and to accuse us together of doing something that qualifies for some really extraordinary way of going back and unwinding the judgment is just appalling to me,” he said.
Assistant Attorney General Tyler Broker filed the motion for relief from judgment on Nov. 19. It says the state’s $500,000 settlement offer allowed judgment to be entered against the state public safety department and “for all claims that arise from this case.”
The plaintiff’s signed acceptance of the offer did not include the phrase about settling all claims arising from the case. Both versions were filed with the superior court, and the version the state judge, Thomas Temple, signed off on didn’t include the “all claims” phrase.
According to Broker’s motion, “Because Final Judgement did not reflect the terms of the State’s offer[,] Final Judgement was unfairly obtained.”
Barber – Wrobel’s attorney – said his position remains that proceedings were fair and that the settlement only resolved claims against the public safety department, not the individual officers. He also said the department of law is using “heavy-handed tactics” rather than engaging in negotiations.
“They act like they can run roughshod over – like, in this case – Mr. Wrobel, procedurally, and it isn’t right,” he said.
This August, Wrobel filed the second lawsuit, which is now in U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska, and it only names the individual officers as defendants. They are AST Captain Eric Spitzer, AST Lieutenant Michael Roberts, AST Trooper Trevor Norris, AST Trooper Brian Hibbs, University of Alaska Fairbanks Police Department Officer Kelly Copeland, Former AST Trooper Cody Taylor, DPS Deputy Fire Marshal Kyle Carrington, AST Sergeant Lucas Altepeter and AST Investigator Nicholas Sailer.
After a failed attempt to dismiss the federal suit, Broker, the state attorney, also filed motions to stay proceedings in the Alaska District Court case pending resolution of the settlement dispute in Fairbanks Superior Court. In a Dec. 11 order, Holland, the federal judge, denied those attempts, as well.
Holland’s order says the state may or may not have a basis for attacking the state court judgment. But it says the “substantive disagreement which the parties have been unable to resolve is not an impediment to this case moving forward.”
Oral argument in the state court case is currently scheduled for Feb. 25. An Alaska Department of Law spokesperson did not provide answers to emailed questions in time for this story.