Three of Colorado’s sitting federal judges taught part-time at the University of Colorado’s law school while they handled civil cases involving the university or associated entities.

On July 30, the advocacy group Fix the Court released a report naming 24 federal judges throughout the country who did not recuse themselves from cases in which one of the parties was the university where they also taught as adjunct professors. The report identified U.S. Magistrate Judge N. Reid Neureiter as someone who did not recuse from multiple cases involving CU.

However, Colorado Politics’ independent docket review determined that Neureiter, U.S. Magistrate Judge Timothy P. O’Hara and U.S. District Court Judge Daniel D. Domenico all taught at least one course at Colorado Law. At the same time, they had cases pending before them in which CU itself, its board of regents, another of its schools or its medical authority was a defendant in a civil case.

“It’s a clear ‘appearance of impropriety’ problem, and it’s also a problem in that judges should generally not hear cases involving the entities that are paying them,” wrote Fix the Court. “Everyone knows that the Notre Dame Law School is an integral part of Notre Dame University, as are the law schools of Yale University, the University of Texas, the University of Colorado, and more to their parent institutions.”

The group noted that it had not identified all instances of federal judges handling cases involving the universities at which they teach. Fix the Court also acknowledged that judicial guidance does not mandate recusal, but simply asks judges to consider the totality of the circumstances when deciding if their teaching role should trigger disqualification.

However, the report explained that U.S. Supreme Court Justices Neil M. Gorsuch and Amy Coney Barrett apparently took action to recuse themselves from cases involving the schools at which they taught when they sat on the Denver-based and Chicago-based appeals courts, respectively.

Due to the massive turnover recently on Colorado’s U.S. District Court, Colorado Politics examined which of the state’s federal judges served as adjunct professors from spring 2020 onward. Although multiple state judges taught part-time at the University of Denver’s law school, no federal judges appeared in its list of adjunct faculty, and an administrator did not respond to questions from Colorado Politics.

At Colorado Law, Domenico taught one course in spring 2022. Neureiter taught classes in fall 2021 and 2022. O’Hara, who joined the court in the past year but began teaching while he was a federal public defender, was an adjunct professor in fall 2024 and will also teach a course in fall 2025.

Looking specifically at the cases that overlapped with each judge’s time in the classroom, Domenico handled a disability discrimination case against the board of regents; an employment discrimination case against the university; and a sex discrimination case against the regents.

It was not apparent from the dockets whether Domenico ever notified the parties about his role with Colorado Law. However, U.S. Magistrate Judge Maritza Dominguez Braswell, who was also assigned to the sex discrimination case, did write a docket entry alerting the parties that in her prior role, she oversaw the work of lawyers who represented CU at the Colorado Attorney General’s Office. She invited the parties to seek her recusal, which they did not. 

O’Hara is assigned to two ongoing lawsuits: a sexual misconduct-related case against the university and an employment discrimination case against the school of medicine. The dockets do not indicate that O’Hara notified the parties about his adjunct faculty position.

Neureiter’s two semesters of teaching overlapped with his handling of a COVID-19 vaccine exemption case against the university; a negligence case against the University of Colorado Hospital, whose directors are appointed by CU’s regents; a disability discrimination case against the university; a civil fraud case against the university; and a civil fraud case against the hospital authority. The dockets do not show that Neureiter informed the parties about his teaching at Colorado Law.

However, in June 2024, while holding a scheduling conference for another lawsuit against CU, Neureiter told the parties without prompting that he had taught at Colorado Law in the past and “I anticipate doing so again.”

“I don’t think that that creates a conflict,” he added, while inviting the parties to seek his recusal if they wished.

Through the district court, Colorado Politics asked all three judges why they did not recuse, whether they provided disclosures to the litigants that were similar to the one Neureiter made, and whether it would have been better to recuse to avoid an appearance of impropriety.

“Our judicial officers, including Judge Domenico, Judge Neureiter, and Judge O’Hara have no comment on decisions each made in individual cases,” responded clerk Jeffrey P. Colwell. “They are aware of, and comply with, relevant case law, rules, and guidance on recusals.”

Amy Bauer, the associate dean for instructional development at Colorado Law, said the current rate for adjunct faculty is $2,010 per credit hour, with judges often teaching one- or two-credit classes. Federal district and magistrate judges earn in excess of $200,000 per year.

Former U.S. Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix, who retired from the court in 2023, also handled three cases while she taught at Colorado Law as an adjunct professor in 2020 and 2021. Mix told Colorado Politics she had a practice of making an “oral disclosure” about her role in every case involving the university.

“I didn’t automatically recuse in those cases because I followed the guidance of the Code of Conduct for federal judges, weighed the applicable factors, and determined recusal wasn’t necessary,” said Mix, who is now an arbitrator. “As the Fix the Court report points out, the Code does not mandate recusal in such cases. Instead, judges are instructed to do what they do every day: weigh appropriate factors and make a determination. Whether serving on such a case creates an appearance of impropriety is subjective, of course, which is why I always invited the lawyers to tell me their view.”