78-CV-20-8

Filed in District Court

State of Minnesota
2/21/2020 9:01 AM

STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT

COUNTY OF TRAVERSE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Court File Number: 78-CV-20-8
Case Type: Conciliation
Judge Assigned: Amy Doll
Nancy Budke and Keith Budke,
Plaintiffs,

vs. SUMMONS

Nicholas A. Olsen,
Defendant.

THIS SUMMONS IS DIRECTED TO:

1. YOU ARE BEING SUED. The Plaintiff has started a lawsuit against you. The
Plaintiffs Complaint against you is attached to this summons. Do not throw these
papers away. They are official papers that affect your rights. You must respond to this
lawsuit even though it may not yet be filed with the Court and there may be no court
file number on this summons.

2. YOU MUST REPLY WITHIN 20 DAYS TO PROTECT YOUR RIGHTS.

You must give or mail to the person who signed this summons a written response
called an Answer Within 20 days of the date on which you received this Summons. You
must send a copy of your Answer to the person who signed this summons located at:

Ronald R. Frauenshuh, Ir.

129NW 2nd St.
Ortonville, MN 56278
320-839-2546

3. YOU MUST RESPOND TO EACH CLAIM. The Answer is your written response to
the Plaintiffs Complaint. In your Answer you must state whether you agree or disagree
with each paragraph of the Complaint. If you believe the Plaintiff should not be given
everything asked for in the Complaint, you must say so in your Answer.

4.YOU WILL LOSE YOUR CASE IF YOU DO NOT SEND A WRITTEN

RESPONSE TO TIIE COMPLAINT TO THE PERSON WHO SIGNED THIS
SUMMONS.

If you do not Answer within 20 days, you will lose this case. You will not get to tell
4
 78-CV-20-8
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
2/21/2020 9:01 AM

your side of the story, and the Court may decide against you and award the Plaintiff
everything asked for in the complaint. If you do not want to contest the claims stated in
the complaint, you do not need to respond. A default judgment can then be entered
against you for the relief requested in the complaint.

5. LEGAL ASSISTANCE. You may wish to get legal help from a lawyer. If you do not
have a lawyer, the Court Administrator may have information about places where you
can get legal assistance. Even if you cannot get legal help, you must still provide a
written Answer to protect your rights or you may lose the case.

6. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION. The parties may agree to or be ordered

to participate in an alternative dispute resolution process under Rule 114 of the
Minnesota General Rules of Practice. You must still send your written response to the
Complaint even if you expect to use alternative means of resolving this dispute.

MK
The object of this action is:

amalgam
Plaintiff’s Attorney Date
Ronald R. Frauenshuh, Ir.
129NW 2nd St.
Ortonville, MN 56278
Telephone #: 320-839-2546
Atty. Reg. #0136220

s @scANNE':
 78-CV-20-8
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
2/21/2020 9:01 AM

STATE OF MINNESOTA DISTRICT COURT

COUNTY OF TRAVERSE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Nancy Budke and Keith Budke Court File Number: 78-CV-20-8
Plaintiffs,

vs. COMPLAINT

Nicholas A. Olsen,
Defendant

Plaintiffs state and alleges as follows:

1. Plaintiffs Nancy Budke and Keith Budke reside in Wheaton in Traverse County,
Minnesota.

2. Defendant Nicholas Olsen resides in Maple Lake in Wright County, Minnesota

3. Traverse County is the proper venue for this matter because the court consolidated
the Defendants claims and Plaintiff for judicial expediency.

This Court has jurisdiction over this matter because both parties reside in Minnesota
and used Traverse County to resolve the dispute; the CLAIMS

4. Plaintiff re-alleges the previous paragraphs.

5. The Plaintiff sold the Defendant nucs/ bee hives on or about May 14, 2019 in
Texas. Prior to the sale of nucs/ bee hives the Defendant inspected the
equipment thoroughly and Defendant found nucs/ beehives usable and
purchased the equipment. Defendant made no claim that the nucs/ bee hives
were infected or had any disease at the time of inspection.

6. The Defendant then left for Minnesota and upon arriving he refused to pay for
part the purchase of the nucs/ beehives.

7. Said actions constitute breach of contract and as the proximate cause of the
breach the Plaintiff has incurred a loss of about $3000.00.

CAUSE OF ACTION 2
9. Plaintiff re-alleges the previous paragraphs and in addition states the following:

10. Defendant in an attempt to slander and libel the Plaintiffs made allegations on
Facebook and other social media that the hives had maggots and or American
Foul Brood. Defendant knew this was untrue as evidenced by his
1

@scmnaf
 78-CV-20-8
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
2/21/2020 9:01 AM

misrepresentations that he had the nucs/bee hives inspected in Minnesota by an

expert. This was untrue and Defendant knew all of these allegations were false.
Defendant continued to publish these false statements on social media numerous
times. See attached Exhibit 1.

11. These published facts were not true, and the Defendant knew they were not true
at the time of the publications.

12. They were the proximate cause and the reasons Plaintiffs suffered a loss of
profits (in excess of $50,000) because the Defendant falsely claimed that the
nucs/ bee hives contained maggots and/ or American Foul Brood and the
Plaintiffs lost a substantial profit from the sale of nucs/ bee hives.

CAUSE OF ACTION 3

13. Plaintiff re-alleges the previous paragraphs and in addition states the following:

14. Plaintiff the attempted to sell said equipment to third parties over the internet.

15. Defendant also contacted the same buyer as Plaintiff had contacted him and
misrepresented that he had communicated experts at the University of
Minnesota. In fact, he had never talked to said party and this information was
used in an attempt to deliberately interfere with the Plaintiffs ability to sell the
equipment.

16. This conduct is interference with parties entering into third party contracts.

CAUSE OF ACTION 4

17. Plaintiff re-alleges the previous paragraphs and in addition states the following:

18. As indicated above, the Defendant made numerous intentional

misrepresentation to third parties constituting fraud which proximately caused
harmed the Plaintiffs reputation in the community and wrongfully interfered
with a contract relationship.
 78-CV-20-8
Filed in District Court
State of Minnesota
2/21/2020 9:01 AM

REQUEST FOR RELIEF

Plaintiff requests that the Court:

Enter judgment in favor of plaintiff and against defendant for each of the claims asserted

WK my
in the Complaint, in excess of $50,000.00 and:

Award plaintiff costs and disbursements allowed by Minn. Stat. 549.02, 549.04.

Plaintiff’s Attornei;
0M 5/2 44
Date
Ronald R. Frauenshuh, Jr.
129NW 2nd St.
Ortonville, MN 56278
Telephone #: 320-839-2546
Atty. Reg. #0136220