The federal appeals court based in Denver has rejected ex-Adams County Sheriff Richard A. Reigenborn’s attempt to end a retaliation lawsuit brought by four subordinates Reigenborn fired – including the man who defeated him last year.

Upon taking office after the 2018 election, Reigenborn pushed out multiple high-ranking personnel who had been supporters of Reigenborn’s opponent. Timothy James Coates, Gene Claps, Mark Mitchell and Kevin Currier all retired in lieu of being fired, then filed a lawsuit alleging Reigenborn retaliated against them for exercising their First Amendment right to support their preferred candidate for sheriff.

A judge allowed the claim to proceed to trial, prompting Reigenborn to appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit. In doing so, Reigenborn sought to take advantage of an ambiguity in how sheriffs’ offices are treated legally.

The plaintiffs sued Reigenborn in his individual capacity – meaning a claim against him personally – and his official capacity. A claim against a government employee in their official capacity is effectively one against the government itself. Although individual defendants can be shielded from liability by qualified immunity, that shield is not available to governments for their own role in a constitutional violation.

Last year, U.S. Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak granted Reigenborn qualified immunity as an individual defendant, finding it was unclear whether the plaintiffs owed “political loyalty” to the elected sheriff. Therefore, Reigenborn could not be liable for a constitutional violation by getting rid of perceived dissidents.

At the same time, Varholak allowed the plaintiffs’ official claim to proceed, given that immunity was not available to Reigenborn as a stand-in for Adams County. Reigenborn disputed his status as an official defendant, claiming the Colorado Constitution renders sheriffs separate from their counties. Varholak shot down that argument as a “loophole,” effectively making neither counties nor sheriffs liable for wrongdoing in sheriffs’ offices.

Case: Coates v. Reigenborn

Decided: October 16, 2023

Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court for Colorado

Ruling: 3-0

Judges: Carolyn B. McHugh (author)

Jerome A. Holmes

Joel M. Carson III

Background: Appeals court rejects Adams County’s argument that sheriff’s office is not a ‘public entity’

After Reigenborn appealed Varholak’s decision to the 10th Circuit, the plaintiffs cried foul. An interlocutory – or mid-case – appeal is only available when a judge denies qualified immunity. Here, they pointed out, Varholak had given Reigenborn immunity as an individual defendant. Therefore, Reigenborn could not challenge the retaliation claim against him officially, where immunity did not apply.

In response, Reigenborn argued it would be impossible to “thin-slice” him into an individual and an official under his unique status as sheriff. Even though Reigenborn will not be individually liable, Varholak’s ruling meant he will still be brought to trial – the outcome qualified immunity is designed to avoid.

“Thus, the district court’s ruling requires Sheriff Reigenborn to still go to trial for the exact same conduct for which he is supposed to have qualified immunity,” wrote Assistant County Attorney Michael A. Sink. “Sheriff Reigenborn’s right not to stand trial will be irretrievably lost.”

A three-judge panel of the 10th Circuit was unconvinced. Reigenborn’s claim that he had a “right not to be tried,” wrote Judge Carolyn B. McHugh, ignored the difference between lawsuits against individuals and lawsuits against the government.

“The Sheriff made no assertion before the district court as to the availability of any immunity on his official-capacity claim,” she explained in the Oct. 16 order.

McHugh pointed out Reigenborn could argue at trial that it was improper to hold him liable as a stand-in for Adams County. But the panel had no authority to hear Reigenborn’s interlocutory appeal – nor could it evaluate the plaintiffs’ related challenge to Varholak’s grant of immunity to Reigenborn individually.

Claps defeated Reigenborn in the 2022 Democratic primary and took office this year, making him both a plaintiff and an official named defendant in the case. The parties will appear before Varholak next month for a status conference.

In addition to the civil lawsuit, the Colorado Attorney General’s Office charged Reigenborn criminally earlier this fall with falsifying training records during his time as sheriff.

The case is Coates et al. v. Reigenborn et al.