C.G. v. City of Fort Lupton

2 Citing cases

  1. Interstate Med. Licensure Compact Comm'n v. Bowling

    Civil Action No. 1:20-cv-02942-CMA-NYW (D. Colo. Jun. 23, 2021)   Cited 1 times

    Ms. Bowling alleges that the implied “abruptness” of her departure made her appear “reckless and untrustworthy, ” [#11 at ¶ 41], because as the individual in “total control over operations and technology, ” [id. at ¶ 34], the IMLCC would face “serious hardships” in her absence [id. at 24]. Thus, construing the Counterclaim in a light most favorable to Ms. Bowling, I cannot conclude that Mr. Smith's statements were incapable of a defamatory meaning or effect as a matter of law. See C.G. v. City of Fort Lupton, No. 13-CV-01053-REB-CBS, 2014 WL 2597165, at *14-15 (D. Colo. June 10, 2014) (denying motion to dismiss Colorado defamation claim on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion)).

  2. Stewart v. Okla. Dep't of Corr.

    Case No. CIV-14-167-SPS (E.D. Okla. Mar. 25, 2016)

    Stearns, 615 F.3d at 1282 (quoting Murrell v. Sch. Dist. No. 1, Denver, Colo., 186 F.3d 1238, 1251 (10th Cir. 1999)). "In determining whether a right is clearly established, the relevant inquiry is 'whether it would be clear to a [reasonable government official] that his conduct was unlawful in the situation he confronted.'" C.G. v. City of Fort Lupton, 2014 WL 2597165, at *7 (D. Colo. June 10, 2014) (quoting Saucier, 533 U.S. at 202). In this Circuit, "[t]he right to be free from sexual harassment is clearly established under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."