Rittenhouse’s attorneys sought to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing that Huber’s attorneys failed to properly serve him with a copy of the complaint and failed to show that he conspired with law enforcement and other individuals to impose violence against protesters based on their race.
“We do not agree that Mr. Huber has made any credible claims against Kyle,” Shane P. Martin, a Rittenhouse attorney, told The Washington Post in an interview Thursday. “Although this ruling allows the case to proceed for now, it does not change the facts. … There was no collusion between Kyle and the Kenosha police to single out Anthony Huber, and as already found in a jury, Kyle’s actions that night were not wrongful and were done in self-defense.
Rittenhouse appeared on the streets of Kenosha with an AR-style rifle in August 2020 saying he wanted to help protect businesses amid the chaos that followed the police shooting of Jacob Blake. But in a brief confrontation, Rittenhouse shot and killed 36-year-old Rosenbaum and 26-year-old Huber. He also shot and wounded Gaige Grosskreutz, who is 26 years old.
“[Yesterday’s] The decision puts Anthony’s family one step closer to justice for their son’s unnecessary death,” Anand Swaminathan, an attorney representing Huber’s father, said in an email to The Post. “The lawsuit will continue discovery, allowing for full transparency of the events of that fateful and horrific night.”
Huber’s suit names Rittenhouse, Kenosha County Sheriff David G. Beth, former Kenosha Police Department chief Daniel G. Miskinis, acting Kenosha police chief Eric Larsen, the city of Kenosha and the county of Kenosha.
Attorneys for the law enforcement and government officials being sued did not immediately respond to messages from The Post seeking comment.
Rittenhouse’s lawyers argued that he was not properly served because he did not live in the Florida residence where his sister, who opened the door and received court documents, and his mother lived.
In her ruling Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman wrote that Huber’s attorneys had made extensive efforts to locate Rittenhouse’s permanent residence in order to provide him with court documents while Rittenhouse was “intentionally in hiding.” about his whereabouts.”
Huber “joined three professional investigators who spent more than 100 hours searching for Rittenhouse across the country,” Adelman wrote. “Rittenhouse, by contrast, almost certainly avoided service.”
He also rejected the defense’s claim that Huber’s attorneys incorrectly alleged that Rittenhouse colluded with law enforcement on the night of the protests.
Although some may find the conspiracy allegation “hard to believe,” Adelman wrote, this is not the time for the court to “weigh the evidence” or “decide whether the plaintiff is likely to prove his allegations.”
“As long as the facts alleged by the plaintiff are not imaginary or delusional, the court must accept them as true,” Adelman wrote. “Deciding whether the allegations are true or false will come later in the case, after all sides have had a chance to present their evidence.”
Mark Guarino, Kim Bellware and Mark Berman contributed to this report.
