Defendant’s Original Answer to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint

30028/735691/ctb Page 1 of 13

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

BRYAN RISER, §

Plaintiff, §

§

vs. § Civil Action No. 3:22-CV-01014-C

§

§

ESTEBAN MONTENEGRO, §

Defendant. §

DEFENDANT ESTEBAN MONTENEGRO’S ORIGINAL ANSWER, AFFIRMATIVE 

DEFENSES, AND JURY DEMAND TO PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

NOW COMES Esteban Montenegro, Defendant in the above-styled and numbered cause 

(hereinafter “Defendant”) and files his Original Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Jury Demand

to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint (Dkt. 1). In support of this answer, Defendant respectfully 

shows as follows:

I.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

 Defendant Esteban Montenegro generally denies all of Plaintiff Bryan Riser’s

(hereinafter “Riser” or “Plaintiff”) allegations brought against him except where he specifically 

admits them. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(b)(3). Defendant denies the allegations contained in the subheadings contained in Section IV of Plaintiff’s Complaint. Defendant specifically denies that he 

violated Riser’s Fourth Amendment rights. 

II. 

ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S ORIGINAL COMPLAINT

1. Defendant admits that this is a civil rights action brought under section 1983 but 

denies the remaining allegations contained in the first sentence of paragraph 1 of 

Plaintiff’s Complaint. Defendant denies the remaining allegations contained in 

Case 3:22-cv-01014-K Document 13 Filed 09/30/22 Page 1 of 13 PageID 37
Defendant’s Original Answer to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint

30028/735691/ctb Page 2 of 13

paragraph 1 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

2. Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 2 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

3. Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 3 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

4. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations contained in the first sentence of paragraph 4 of Plaintiff’s 

Complaint regarding the length of time Plaintiff spent in jail, when he was released 

or why he was released. Defendant denies it was a wrongful murder charge. 

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations contained in second sentence of paragraph 4 of Plaintiff’s 

Complaint regarding what position the prosecutor took during the examining trial

and whether that position was “highly unusual,” but otherwise admits the remaining 

allegation that the prosecutor argued that there was no probable cause and that Riser 

should not have been arrested. This is contrary to the prosecutor’s prior stance that 

there was “baseline probable cause” to arrest Riser for the Saenz murder and that 

Riser should have been arrested. Defendant is without knowledge or information 

sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in the fourth

sentence of paragraph 4 of Plaintiff’s Complaint regarding any alleged admissions 

made by John Creuzot. Defendant denies all remaining allegations contained in 

paragraph 4 of Plaintiff’s Complaint. 

5. Defendant admits the Kaufman County District Attorney is considering charges but

denies that Defendant’s conduct was “ill-conceived [and] targeted”. Otherwise, 

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 5 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

Case 3:22-cv-01014-K Document 13 Filed 09/30/22 Page 2 of 13 PageID 38
Defendant’s Original Answer to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint

30028/735691/ctb Page 3 of 13

6. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 6 of Plaintiff's Complaint.

7. Defendant admits that he is a resident of Texas and is a detective with the Dallas 

Police Department. Defendant denies the remaining allegations contained in 

paragraph 7 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

8. Defendant admits that this Court has jurisdiction over this case but Defendant is 

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

remaining allegations contained in paragraph 8 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

9. Defendant admits that venue is proper in the Northern District, but Defendant is

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

remaining allegations contained in paragraph 9 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

IV.

FACTS

10. Defendant admits the allegation that Plaintiff was arrested on two counts of capital 

murder but Defendant denies that the arrest occurred on March 3, 2021.

11. Defendant denies the allegation contained in the first sentence of paragraph 11 of 

Plaintiff’s Complaint. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to 

form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 11 of 

Plaintiff’s Complaint.

12. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations contained in the first sentence of paragraph 12 of Plaintiff’s 

Complaint. Defendant denies the allegations contained in the second sentence of 

paragraph 12 of Plaintiff's Complaint.

13. Defendant admits the allegation that Liza Saenz was found dead in the Trinity River 

Case 3:22-cv-01014-K Document 13 Filed 09/30/22 Page 3 of 13 PageID 39
Defendant’s Original Answer to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint

30028/735691/ctb Page 4 of 13

but Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to 

the truth of the allegation that she was found at 11:39 p.m. on March 10, 2017. 

Defendant admits the allegations contained in the second and third sentences of

paragraph 13 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

14. Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 14 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

15. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 15 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

16. Defendant admits the allegations contained in the first and second sentences of 

paragraph 16 of Plaintiff’s Complaint. Defendant is without knowledge or 

information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in 

the third sentence of paragraph 16 of Plaintiff’s Complaint. Defendant denies the 

allegations contained in the fourth and fifth sentences of paragraph 16 of Plaintiff’s 

Complaint.

17. Defendant admits the allegations contained in the first sentence of paragraph 17 of 

Plaintiff’s Complaint. Defendant admits the allegation that Estevan Lara was found 

guilty and made remarks out loud in the courtroom to Saenz. Defendant is without 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining

allegations in the second sentence of paragraph 17 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

Defendant denies the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 17 of Plaintiff’s 

Complaint.

18. Defendant admits the allegation that Kilpatrick also revealed that he had committed 

the previously unknown murder of a man named Albert Douglas. Defendant is 

without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

Case 3:22-cv-01014-K Document 13 Filed 09/30/22 Page 4 of 13 PageID 40
Defendant’s Original Answer to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint

30028/735691/ctb Page 5 of 13

remaining allegations contained in the first sentence of paragraph 18 of Plaintiff’s 

Complaint. Defendant admits the allegations contained in the remaining two 

sentences of paragraph 18 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

19. Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 19 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

20. Defendant admits that Plaintiff had driven Kilpatrick around the area where Douglas 

could be found, met with Kilpatrick at Kidd’s residence and paid him $3500. 

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 20 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

Defendant denies the characterization of Plaintiff’s heading before paragraph 

21 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

21. Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 21 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

22. Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 22 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

23. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 23 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

24. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 24 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

25. Defendant admits that there was an investigation into banking records as alleged in 

paragraph 25 of Plaintiff’s Complaint. Otherwise, Defendant denies the remaining 

allegations contained in paragraph 25 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

26. Defendant admits that Kilpatrick was confused as to the timeline of the murders. 

Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the 

truth of the remaining allegations contained in the first, second, third, and fourth 

sentences of paragraph 26 of Plaintiff’s Complaint. Defendant denies the fifth 

Case 3:22-cv-01014-K Document 13 Filed 09/30/22 Page 5 of 13 PageID 41
Defendant’s Original Answer to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint

30028/735691/ctb Page 6 of 13

sentence of paragraph 26 of Plaintiff’s Complaint. Defendant again admits that 

Kilpatrick was confused as to the timeline of the murders. Defendant is without 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining 

allegations contained in the final sentence of paragraph 26 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

Defendant denies the characterization of Plaintiff’s heading before paragraph 

27 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

27. Defendant admits that he set up an interview with Kidd. Defendant denies the 

remaining allegations contained in the first and second sentences of paragraph 27 of 

Plaintiff’s Complaint. As to the allegation that Kidd’s version of events contradicted 

Kilpatrick’s in several key ways, Defendant responds as follows:

• Defendant admits that there was a meeting at Kidd’s house and that Kidd 

denied seeing any money change hands. Defendant denies that Kidd failed to 

identify Riser from a photographic line up as the driver. Defendant is without 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

allegation that there was an SUV or that Kidd could not confirm the color of 

the SUV.

• Defendant admits that Kidd denied getting any money. Defendant is without 

knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the 

remaining allegations contained in the second bullet point in paragraph 27 of 

Plaintiff’s Complaint.

• Defendant admits that Kilpatrick gave a description of burning Douglas’s ID 

card in Kidd’s yard. Defendant is without knowledge or information 

sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations 

Case 3:22-cv-01014-K Document 13 Filed 09/30/22 Page 6 of 13 PageID 42
Defendant’s Original Answer to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint

30028/735691/ctb Page 7 of 13

contained in the third bullet point in paragraph 27 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

• Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as 

to the truth of the allegations contained in the first sentence of the fourth 

bullet point in paragraph 27 of Plaintiff’s Complaint. Defendant denies the 

allegations contained in the second sentence of the fourth bullet point in 

paragraph 27 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

• Defendant denies the allegation that Kilpatrick and Kidd gave completely 

contradictory descriptions of what happened when they stopped at a gas 

station after killing Liza Saenz. Defendant is without knowledge or 

information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining

allegations contained in the fifth bullet point in paragraph 27 of Plaintiff’s 

Complaint.

28. Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 28 of Plaintiff’s Complaint. 

29. Defendant denies the allegations contained in the first and second sentences of

paragraph 29 of Plaintiff’s Complaint. Defendant is without knowledge or 

information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in 

the remainder of paragraph 29 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

30. Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 30 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

Defendant denies the characterization of Plaintiff’s heading before paragraph 

31 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

31. Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 31 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

32. Defendant acknowledges that the text of the probable cause affidavit speaks for itself 

and admits Plaintiff’s allegations to the extent they are accurate quotations of the 

Case 3:22-cv-01014-K Document 13 Filed 09/30/22 Page 7 of 13 PageID 43
Defendant’s Original Answer to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint

30028/735691/ctb Page 8 of 13

probable cause affidavit. To the extent the allegations are inaccurate, Defendant 

denies Plaintiff’s allegations. Defendant denies the allegation that the probable cause 

affidavit most egregiously misstates information. Defendant admits that the FBI Cell 

Site Location analysis revealed that Plaintiff’s cell phone data placed him in the 

location of the planning of Douglas’s and Saenz’s murders. Defendant admits that 

the FBI Cell Site Location analysis revealed that Plaintiff’s cell phone data did not 

place him in the location of Douglas’s and Saenz’s murders when they occurred. 

Defendant admits that he testified during Plaintiff’s examining trial that he made a 

cut and paste error. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to 

form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in the last sentence of

paragraph 32 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

33. Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 33 of Plaintiff’s Complaint. 

34. Defendant denies the allegations contained in the first sentence of paragraph 34 of 

Plaintiff’s Complaint. Defendant acknowledges that the probable cause affidavit 

speaks for itself and admits Plaintiff’s allegations to the extent they are accurate 

quotations of the probable cause affidavit. To the extent the allegations are 

inaccurate, Defendant denies Plaintiff’s allegations. Defendant admits that the text in 

question was sent prior to the time Douglas went missing. Defendant denies the 

allegation that the affidavit intentionally omitted any information. 

35. Defendant acknowledges that the text message in question speaks for itself and 

admits Plaintiff’s allegations to the extent they are accurate quotations of the text 

message in question. To the extent the allegations are inaccurate, Defendant denies 

Plaintiff’s allegations. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to 

Case 3:22-cv-01014-K Document 13 Filed 09/30/22 Page 8 of 13 PageID 44
Defendant’s Original Answer to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint

30028/735691/ctb Page 9 of 13

form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in the second sentence of

paragraph 35 of Plaintiff’s Complaint. Defendant denies the remaining allegations 

contained in paragraph 35 of Plaintiff's Complaint.

36. Defendant acknowledges that the probable cause affidavit speaks for itself and 

admits Plaintiff’s allegations to the extent they are accurate quotations of the 

probable cause affidavit. To the extent the allegations are inaccurate, Defendant 

denies Plaintiff’s allegations. Defendant denies that the probable cause affidavit is 

misleading and/or omits critical context. Defendant admits that merely going to a 

donut shop does not mean that a person murders another person. Defendant denies 

the allegations contained in the fourth and fifth sentences of paragraph 36 of 

Plaintiff’s Complaint. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to 

form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in the final sentence of

paragraph 36 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

37. Defendant acknowledges that the probable cause affidavit speaks for itself and 

admits Plaintiff’s allegations to the extent they are accurate quotations of the 

probable cause affidavit. To the extent the allegations are inaccurate, Defendant 

denies Plaintiff’s allegations. Defendant otherwise denies the allegations contained 

in paragraph 37 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

38. Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 38 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

39. Defendant incorporates by reference his answers to all preceding paragraphs which 

are referenced by Plaintiff in paragraph 39 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

40. Defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraph 40 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

41. Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 41 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

Case 3:22-cv-01014-K Document 13 Filed 09/30/22 Page 9 of 13 PageID 45
Defendant’s Original Answer to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint

30028/735691/ctb Page 10 of 13

42. Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 42 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

43. Paragraph 43 of Plaintiff’s Complaint is not an allegation of fact to which a response 

is required. Otherwise, Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to 

form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 43 of Plaintiff’s 

Complaint.

44. Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 44 of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

53[sic]. Defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraph 53 of Plaintiff’s 

Complaint.

54[sic]. Defendant also demands a trial by jury.

55[sic]. Defendant denies Plaintiff is entitled to any relief contained in the Prayer section 

of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

III.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

1. Defendant affirmatively pleads that he did not deprive Plaintiff of any Federal or 

Constitutionally protected rights and/or interests guaranteed under the United States Constitution 

or Federal law.

2. Defendant affirmatively pleads that he is entitled to qualified immunity from 

Plaintiff’s claims because, on the occasion in question, he was a public official acting within the 

scope of his discretionary authority and in the course of his official responsibilities, and his 

conduct did not violate clearly established law of which a reasonable person would have known 

at the time, and was further objectively reasonable. Defendant specifically and affirmatively 

pleads his right to present evidence at trial regarding his defense of qualified immunity. 

Defendant specifically and affirmatively pleads his right to have all factual issues regarding his 

defense of qualified immunity presented to the jury for determination and to have all legal issues 

Case 3:22-cv-01014-K Document 13 Filed 09/30/22 Page 10 of 13 PageID 46
Defendant’s Original Answer to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint

30028/735691/ctb Page 11 of 13

regarding his defense of qualified immunity be presented to the Court for determination. 

Defendant specifically and affirmatively pleads that any mixed questions of law and fact be 

presented to the appropriate decisionmaker according to the applicable law.

3. Defendant affirmatively pleads that, in light of his assertion of qualified 

immunity, discovery is not appropriate until such time as that defense has been adjudicated.

4. By way of affirmative defense, Defendant pleads that Plaintiff has failed to state a 

claim upon which relief may be granted.

5. Defendant asserts that he complied with all federal laws.

6. Defendant affirmatively pleads that his actions were lawful, proper, and justified 

under the circumstances.

7. Defendant affirmatively pleads that he is not liable for punitive/exemplary 

damages. Defendant affirmatively pleads that he did not act with reckless or callous disregard 

for Plaintiff’s rights.

8. Defendant affirmatively pleads that a warrant and/or probable cause existed to 

arrest and seize Plaintiff.

9. Defendant affirmatively pleads that probable cause was found by an independent 

intermediary thereby breaking the causal chain and insulating Defendant from liability.

Defendant affirmatively pleads the protections of the independent intermediary doctrine.

10. Defendant affirmatively pleads that his actions were lawful, proper, and justified 

under the circumstances.

11. Defendant affirmatively pleads that he did not act with reckless or callous 

disregard for Plaintiff’s rights.

12. Defendant affirmatively pleads that he did not act with malice, recklessness, 

Case 3:22-cv-01014-K Document 13 Filed 09/30/22 Page 11 of 13 PageID 47
Defendant’s Original Answer to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint

30028/735691/ctb Page 12 of 13

callous indifference, or deliberate indifference to Plaintiff’s Constitutional or Federal statutory 

rights.

13. Defendant affirmatively pleads that the Plaintiff’s own acts or omissions caused 

or contributed to the Plaintiff’s alleged injuries. Defendant affirmatively pleads that the 

intentional and/or negligent acts of the Plaintiff constituted the sole proximate cause of 

Plaintiff’s alleged injuries and damages, if any, and such intentional and/or negligent acts should 

be submitted to the jury upon the trial of this case. 

14. Defendant reserves the right to raise additional affirmative defenses.

IV.

JURY DEMAND

Defendant demands a trial by jury.

Respectfully submitted,

FANNING, HARPER, MARTINSON,

BRANDT & KUTCHIN, P.C.

By: /s/ Thomas P. Brandt

THOMAS P. BRANDT

State Bar No. 02883500

tbrandt@fhmbk.com

STEPHEN D. HENNINGER

State Bar No. 00784256

shenninger@fhmbk.com

CHRISTOPHER BRANDT

State Bar No. 24072262

cbrandt@fhmbk.com

FANNING, HARPER, MARTINSON,

BRANDT & KUTCHIN, P.C.

One Glen Lakes

8140 Walnut Hill Lane, Ste. 200

Dallas, Texas 75231

(214) 369-1300 (office)

(214) 987-9649 (telecopier)

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT

Case 3:22-cv-01014-K Document 13 Filed 09/30/22 Page 12 of 13 PageID 48
Defendant’s Original Answer to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint

30028/735691/ctb Page 13 of 13

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on September 30, 2022, I electronically filed the foregoing document 

with the Clerk of the Court through the ECF system and an email notice of the electronic filing 

was sent to all attorneys of record.

/s/ Thomas P. Brandt

THOMAS P. BRANDT

Case 3:22-cv-01014-K Document 13 Filed 09/30/22 Page 13 of 13 PageID 49