A welfare caseworker did not violate the constitutional rights of a Morgan County man by finding he mistreated an at-risk adult, a federal judge has ruled, even though the state later reversed that abuse finding.

Nicholas Erker raised claims of defamation, malicious prosecution and due process violations against Carrie Schmeeckle, an Adult Protective Services caseworker. He also sought to hold Morgan County and its elected officials liable for Schmeeckle’s findings of abuse and statements to authorities based her allegedly-subpar investigation of the facts.

But U.S. Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix determined Erker’s claims were insufficient because not only did Schmeeckle have no constitutional obligation to consider evidence offered by Erker when determining whether he had assaulted his ex-wife, but she found Schmeeckle did have adequate information to act on the allegations.

Schmeeckle “could have reasonably and in good faith determined that Mrs. Erker, a person with a brain injury, was an at-risk adult who was susceptible to mistreatment or self-neglect,” Mix wrote in a July 27 order. “Based on that determination, Defendant Schmeeckle had probable cause to carry out an investigation of the allegation that Plaintiff had assaulted Mrs. Erker.”

Erker’s lawsuit alleged the Morgan County Department of Human Services assigned Schmeeckle in June 2020 to assess an allegation he had abused his ex-wife, Shayla Erker. The department reportedly classified her as an “at-risk adult” based on a brain injury, but Nicholas Erker contested that designation.

The department determined there was sufficient evidence of abuse.

Erker protested, alleging the government did not take into account his ex-wife’s “aggressiveness and initiation of the physical confrontation.” Erker also claimed Schmeeckle inappropriately contacted the district attorney’s office in August 2020 to recommend a pending misdemeanor charge against Erker be enhanced to a felony, based on his actions against an at-risk adult.

Afterward, all criminal proceedings ended in his favor, Erker said. The Colorado Department of Human Services also signed a settlement agreement with Erker in November 2020 overturning the finding that he had mistreated an at-risk adult.

Erker then initiated multiple lawsuits. In December 2020, he sued the district attorney for a failure to prosecute Shayla Erker for allegedly assaulting him. Eight months later, he sued Schmeeckle and Morgan County’s human services department in federal court. Finally, in June of this year he filed another complaint in state court against his ex-wife for defamation and malicious prosecution.

In his lawsuit against Schmeeckle, Erker argued she had acted maliciously by finding he had abused an at-risk adult and by making statements to law enforcement to that effect.

“Ms. Schmeeckle knew (or plainly should have known) that Ms. Erker does not meet the definition of an ‘at-risk adult’ under the relevant statutes, meaning that Ms. Schmeeckle (whose role is to investigate allegations of abuse against actual ‘at-risk adults’) should not have been involved in the case to begin with,” wrote attorney Richard F. Bednarski.

In response, the defendants asked Mix to dismiss the lawsuit and contended Schmeeckle fulfilled her duties under the law. Video showed Erker did, in fact, hit and kick his ex-wife, and state law directs Adult Protective Services workers to make reports when they reasonably believe an at-risk adult is being mistreated.

“The APS statute obligates prompt reporting, within ‘not more than twenty-four hours,'” wrote attorney Leslie L. Schluter. “These points refute Mr. Erker’s claim that Ms. Schmeeckle acted ‘heedlessly and recklessly, without regard to consequences, or the rights and safety of others’ in contacting law enforcement.”

In dismissing the lawsuit, Mix noted the county’s human services department is actually an arm of the state government, meaning governmental immunity precluded Erker from seeking monetary damages. As for Erker’s malicious prosecution claim against Schmeeckle, Mix determined Schmeeckle had probable cause of abuse on an at-risk adult and Erker had not plausibly alleged she acted maliciously.

Mix also observed Erker was relying on the wrong definition of an at-risk adult. Although the state’s criminal code describes at-risk adults to include the elderly and those with disabilities, the human services code considers adults to be at-risk when they are susceptible to mistreatment because of difficulties understanding or communicating their personal decisions.

“The Court construes this authority to indicate that brain injuries are likely a condition that APS employees consider when evaluating whether a person is an at-risk adult,” Mix wrote.

Finally, she explained that in order for Erker to enjoy procedural protections during the welfare investigation, he had to identify a legally-guaranteed interest. The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized such interests can include freedom from restraint, the right to enter into contracts or the liberty to worship. Erker had not alleged anything along those lines was at stake for him and, therefore, Schmeeckle was not constitutionally required to analyze Erker’s evidence in her investigation.

Attorneys for Erker and the defendants did not respond to a request for comment. Erker’s state lawsuit against his ex-wife, in which he alleges she made defamatory comments about him in TikTok videos, is still pending. A lawyer for Shayla Erker told Colorado Politics he believes the facts and the law will also cause Nicholas Erker’s claims to falter in state court.

The case is Erker v. Schmeeckle et al.