A federal judge concluded last month that a whistleblower lawsuit could not succeed against Teller County Sheriff Jason Mikesell, nor could the related claims of retaliation lodged by a former commander in the office.

Ronald “Greg” Couch worked for the sheriff’s office between 2014 and 2021. In his telling, his relationship with Mikesell began to sour in 2020, after which Mikesell directed Couch to undergo a “fitness-for-duty” examination in June 2021. That same day, Couch resigned.

He subsequently filed suit against Mikesell, alleging he underwent a “constructive termination” — meaning he was not fired outright, but rather endured working conditions so intolerable that a reasonable person would feel forced to resign. Couch also claimed his treatment stemmed from disclosures he made about misconduct within the government.

On Oct. 30, U.S. District Court Senior Judge Raymond P. Moore sided against Couch. Based on the evidence the parties provided, he did not see how the fitness-for-duty exam, nor any slights Couch experienced during his employment, rose to the level of intolerable working conditions.

Further, Moore noted Colorado’s whistleblower protection law applies only to the judicial, legislative or executive branch “of state government.”

“Based on these definitions, nothing in the statute expressly supports Plaintiff’s position that the Teller County Sheriff’s Office is a state agency or that he was a state employee,” Moore wrote.

Lawyers for Couch and Mikesell did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment.

Couch’s lawsuit alleged Mikesell took control of the operations division and emergency response team away from Couch in March 2020. Couch complained to Mikesell about another commanding officer creating a “hostile work environment,” but Mikesell allegedly never followed through.

Couch also complained about an alleged forgery of a county document and suspected Mikesell was inappropriately using public resources for his private business. Finally, Couch expressed his concerns about the sheriff’s office hiring Brandon Victor, a Pueblo police officer with a history of shooting suspects.

In response, Miksell ordered Couch to see a psychiatrist in Denver to determine his fitness for duty. Couch felt he had no choice but to resign, feeling the evaluation “effectively marked the end of his career.”

Mikesell moved to end the lawsuit in his favor, submitting evidence that painted Couch’s allegations in a different light.

The sheriff produced documents suggesting Couch’s mood swings, erratic behavior, medication and alcohol use were concerning. Mikesell also cited Couch’s post-traumatic stress disorder he developed earlier in his career.

“Mr. Couch claims that the direction to attend a fitness-for-duty evaluation was a constructive termination, but such evaluations are not disciplinary. Salary and benefits continue during a fitness-for-duty evaluation,” wrote attorney Leslie L. Schluter. “Mr. Couch had a clear alternative to resignation; he could have attended a fitness-for-duty exam.”

Couch countered that the entirety of his negative experiences with Mikesell amounted to constructive termination.

Moore rejected Couch’s arguments. As for the claim that Couch was fired because he spoke up about governmental misconduct, Moore concluded the law specific to whistleblowers did not apply to Couch as a county sheriff employee.

Turning to Couch’s contention he was retaliated against for his speech in violation of the First Amendment and Colorado Constitution, Moore believed Couch had not established two key factors that apply to public employees: that his speech was outside his official duties and that his comments were a motivating factor behind any adverse treatment.

“Plaintiff’s conclusory assertions about the conditions of his employment are insufficient to show that his workplace became so intolerable that a reasonable person in his position would have felt forced to resign or that he was otherwise subjected to any adverse employment action,” Moore wrote.

The case is Couch v. Mikesell.