Taxi Company's $5 Million Lawsuit Against Watford City Tossed by Federal Judge

This story is based on federal court records, Watford City Council records and North Dakota Secretary of State records. On Oct. 8, Bakken Media reached out to the City of Watford City, the Watford City Police Department, Police Chief Jesse Wellen, City Administrator Curt Moen, the city's attorneys, the owners of both Speedie Cab and Watford City KAB for comment. Bakken Media is reviewing additional information and awaiting responses from some of the parties contacted, and further reporting may follow. This story will be updated with any responses.

A federal judge has thrown out a lawsuit in which the owners of a Watford City taxi company sought at least $5 million from the city, its police department, Police Chief Jesse Wellen and City Administrator Curt Moen.

Stojanka and Dustin Fruchey, who owned Speedie Cab LLC and the hair salon Emerald Roots LLC, claimed police and city leaders spent years ignoring their complaints that a rival taxi company was breaking the law, while enforcing the rules against others. The court dismissed the case on Aug. 4, 2026, and entered judgment in favor of the city and all of the defendants.

The Frucheys represented themselves in the case, without a lawyer.

What the lawsuit claimed

The following comes from the Frucheys' complaint and the court's summary of it. These are the Frucheys' allegations. They were never proven or disproven in court; the city and the other defendants asked the court to dismiss the case, and it was dismissed before either side presented evidence.

• Years of complaints about a rival. In February 2022, the Frucheys said, Stojanka Fruchey filed a written complaint with Chief Wellen that multiple businesses were running unlicensed, uninsured vehicles with unqualified drivers, in violation of city code and state law. From 2024 into 2025, they said, they repeatedly reported to officers that a competing company, Watford City KAB, was doing the same. They said no investigation or enforcement followed.
• A disputed crash report. After a March 2024 collision between a Speedie Cab vehicle and a Watford City KAB vehicle, the Frucheys said police wrote up an accident report without interviewing them, even though they said eyewitnesses agreed there was no damage. They said the report was later used for a claim against their insurance, raising their premiums.
• A complaint against them, too. On Jan. 2, 2025, the Frucheys said, a Watford City KAB employee filed a harassment complaint with police against Stojanka Fruchey, which they said they didn't learn about until September 2025. Later in January 2025, when a detective called Stojanka Fruchey about evidence the couple had submitted against KAB, the Frucheys said he told her the matter was "civil" and "not a police matter."
• Dismissed tickets. They said an owner of Watford City KAB was cited in February 2025 for operating an untagged taxi, and that the citation was later dismissed. They also said a KAB driver was cited four times in April and May 2025, and that all but a speeding ticket were dismissed. They pointed to a city ordinance that says the police chief "shall suspend" a taxi license after three or more violations in a 12-month period, and said no suspension followed.
• A meeting with the city administrator. In February 2025, the Frucheys said, Stojanka Fruchey and a former KAB employee met with Moen and gave him sworn statements from former KAB employees backing up their claims. They said Moen told them he would talk with Chief Wellen, but they never heard back.
• Slashed tires. In June 2025, the Frucheys said the tires on a Speedie Cab vehicle were slashed. After posting about it on Facebook, they said, they were told a Watford City KAB driver was responsible. According to the complaint, police opened a case, interviewed the driver and reviewed security-camera footage, which the Frucheys said was obscured by a bright light. The driver denied it, and the Frucheys said police told them nothing more could be done because it was being treated as a "civil matter."
• Festival rides. They said that during Watford City's Home Fest in July 2025 and Rib Fest in August 2025, Watford City KAB openly carried passengers in unlicensed vehicles in view of officers working the events, and no citations were issued.
• A $4,929 records bill. On Oct. 15, 2025, they said, police responded to their public records request with a $4,929 estimate, payable in advance, for about 171 hours of work, including more than 138 hours of redaction.
• Retaliation. They said that after Stojanka Fruchey posted a statement alleging city favoritism in a local Facebook group on Sept. 4, 2025, and they sent the city a written settlement demand on Sept. 15, officers began watching their TikTok videos in which they alleged corruption.

The court did not decide whether any of the allegations in the lawsuit are true. The case was dismissed on legal grounds before any evidence was heard. Watford City KAB was not a party to the lawsuit and has not been accused of wrongdoing by any court.

The Frucheys claimed the city violated their rights to equal protection, due process and free speech, and they also brought a negligence claim. They asked for at least $5 million in damages, paid so that they would net at least $5 million after taxes, along with punitive damages against Wellen and Moen personally, policy changes and other relief. (The court's docket lists a demand of $999,000, but the complaint itself asks for at least $5 million.) They said the city's conduct cost them revenue, customers and higher insurance premiums. They estimated $1.8 million in lost future earnings and said both of their businesses were "no longer viable."

Why the judge threw it out

On July 10, 2026, Magistrate Judge Clare Hochhalter recommended dismissing the entire case in a 22-page report. A U.S. district judge adopted that recommendation on Aug. 4, after the Frucheys filed an objection. Among the reasons:

• No right to an investigation. The court said private citizens don't have a constitutional right to force police to investigate or prosecute someone, so declining to act on their complaints wasn't a constitutional violation.
• Both companies were handled the same way. A police report the Frucheys submitted to the court showed that in January 2025, Chief Wellen directed that all complaints from both Speedie Cab and Watford City KAB go to him or a detective. The court said that showed the two companies were treated alike, not differently.
• Watching public videos isn't retaliation. The court said officers viewing TikTok videos that the Frucheys posted publicly was not an "adverse action," and the Frucheys kept speaking out anyway.
• Records fees are a state issue. The court said complaints about the $4,929 records estimate belong under North Dakota's open records law, which has its own process through the state attorney general's office, not in a federal civil rights case.
• The businesses needed a lawyer. Speedie Cab LLC and Emerald Roots LLC were dropped from the case because companies can't represent themselves in federal court.
• Some claims were waived. The court said the Frucheys did not respond to the city's arguments against their due process and negligence claims, so those claims were treated as waived.
• The police department can't be sued. The court said the police department itself is not a "person" that can be sued under the federal civil rights law.

In the same order, the judge also denied the Frucheys' request, made in their objection to the recommendation, to amend their complaint, calling it untimely and futile.

The court did not decide whether the Frucheys' complaints about Watford City KAB were true. It ruled only that, even taking their claims at face value, they did not add up to a federal civil rights case. At that stage, the city and the other defendants were not required to respond to the individual allegations; they argued that even if the allegations were true, they did not amount to a federal civil rights violation.

What the parties said

Dustin Fruchey told Bakken Media the case involves "a series of events spanning an extended period," and that the couple wants "the facts, our experiences, the allegations made in our court filings, and the documentation supporting our position" presented with context. "Our intention is not to make unsupported allegations or engage in a public disagreement," he wrote. He said he would review the court's decision before answering specific questions, citing possible future legal proceedings. The Frucheys have since offered to answer questions and have provided documentation, which Bakken Media is reviewing.

Police Chief Jesse Wellen, City Administrator Curt Moen, City Attorney Wyatt Voll and the city's attorneys in the case, including Brian D. Schmidt of the Bismarck law firm Smith Porsborg Schweigert Armstrong Moldenhauer & Smith, have not responded to requests for comment yet.

What Watford City KAB says

The owners of Watford City KAB, which was not a party to the lawsuit, provided a written response to Bakken Media's questions. They said:

• Licensing. The company has held a City of Watford City taxi license since December 2022, renewed every year including 2024 and 2025. Its taxi vehicles were licensed and commercially insured and went through the city's insurance and inspection requirements. Bakken Media has requested the city's license records to confirm this.
• Home Fest and Rib Fest. The company disputes that it used unlicensed vehicles. It said it ran two licensed, commercially insured vans, each with one driver, and that employees who attended off duty with family and friends were not working. During Rib Fest, the owners said, a vehicle carrying their relatives was stopped after being reported as an unlicensed KAB taxi. According to the owners, the relatives told the officer they were attending personally, and the officer let them go.
• Favorable treatment. The company disputes that it received favorable treatment. It said it has faced investigations, inspections and changing ordinance requirements, along with warnings about possible fines, closure or loss of its license if it didn't comply.
• Their own complaints. The owners said they have also made complaints to police about Speedie Cab, and that they met with the police chief, sometimes along with the city attorney, about their operations, customer concerns and what they saw as inconsistencies in enforcement. They said police advised them to document their concerns.
• The March 2024 crash. The owners said they saw a Speedie Cab vehicle strike one of their vehicles and reported it to police. They said their mechanic and a body shop evaluated the damage, and that an insurance claim paid toward repairs. They said they can't speak to how the report was later used.
• The tires. The company disputes the allegation that it or one of its drivers damaged Speedie Cab's tires. It said police questioned the driver and that the owners later met with the police chief, the city attorney and a lieutenant to share documentation.

"Watford City KAB is a family-owned business dedicated to providing safe, reliable transportation in our community," the owners wrote. They asked that the story clearly distinguish the complaint's allegations from established facts.

The owners of Watford City KAB have also offered to provide documents and information supporting their account, which Bakken Media will review.

What state records show

These are state business filings with the North Dakota Secretary of State. They are separate from the city taxi licenses at issue in the lawsuit, which are issued by the City of Watford City.

Records from the North Dakota Secretary of State list Speedie Cab LLC, first registered in April 2021, as "Inactive - Involuntary" as of May 29, 2025. The records show the company's annual report was due Nov. 15, 2024, and list its standing as "Not Good" for both its annual report and its registered agent. An involuntary inactive status means the state, not the owners, changed the company's status. State records list the Frucheys' salon company, Emerald Roots LLC, as involuntarily inactivated on the same date, May 29, 2025, and the salon's registered trade name, "Emerald Roots," as involuntarily inactivated on Nov. 29, 2025.

The same state records list Watford City KAB as an active "fictitious partnership name," a registered trade name for a general partnership. It was first filed Nov. 15, 2022, is in good standing and is set to expire Nov. 15, 2027. A trade name registration and a limited liability company are different types of state filings, and neither record shows whether a business holds a city taxi license.

The lawsuit was filed in October 2025, about five months after both of the Frucheys' companies were inactivated. In it, the Frucheys described Speedie Cab as a licensed taxi company. The state records do not show why the businesses stopped operating. Bakken Media asked the Frucheys about the company's state status; they said they were not aware of it and would look into it.

On Oct. 8, Bakken Media requested taxi license records from the City of Watford City's auditor and city attorney for Speedie Cab LLC and Watford City KAB dating back to 2021. In a separate request, Bakken Media asked specifically for Watford City KAB's license records from July and August 2025, to check whether the company held a city taxi license during Home Fest and Rib Fest, when the Frucheys allege it carried passengers in unlicensed vehicles. The city has acknowledged the requests but has not yet provided records, and neither company's city license status has been verified by Bakken Media. This story will be updated when the records are received.

On the city's radar

The case appeared repeatedly on Watford City Council agendas. Minutes from Jan. 5, 2026, note that City Attorney Wyatt Voll "gave an update on the potential litigation with S. Fruchey (Speedy Cab) [sic]." Lawsuit updates were also listed on the Feb. 2 and May 4 agendas, and on an Aug. 24 special meeting agenda, after the case was dismissed. None of those records describe what was discussed.

As of Oct. 9, the federal court docket did not show an appeal.

The case

Fruchey et al. v. City of Watford City et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-00242, U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota. Filed Oct. 20, 2025. Dismissed Aug. 4, 2026. Court records are available through the federal court's PACER system, and the case docket can be viewed on CourtListener.

Bakken Media is not making any allegations. The allegations in this story come from court filings and statements from those involved, and have not been proven in court. A lawsuit is not proof of wrongdoing. If you're named in this story and want to comment, contact us.

Bakken Media corrects errors promptly. To report an error or respond to this story, email bakken.media.z@gmail.com.