Opinion ID: 169583
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Events Precipitating Darr's Termination

Text: On February 25, 2003, CAB met to discuss several topics concerning Telluride's policing methods. Appx., Vol. I, at 326. Several citizens complained, and Darr was one of the marshals identified. Id. at 184. Darr alleges that CAB's chairman stated that Darr had left [his] previous employment under `suspicious circumstances[,]' that [he] had improperly displayed a handgun at a golf course and that [he] had `poached' or stolen a game of golf. Appx., Vol. II, at 524. Telluride received several other complaints about Darr's conduct. For example, the former mayor testified that restaurant and bar owners complained that Darr intimidated their customers and that he performed bar checks in a very rough and abusive manner. Appx., Vol. I, at 238. Others complained that he created pandemonium in another restaurant and that he improperly searched or interrogated a woman who had just fallen out of a window. Id. Moreover, the town manager testified that he received several complaints about Darr and that it became obvious that [Darr] had a difficult time communicating and interacting with a good chunk of the public of this community. Id. at 367. CAB's chairman again made Darr's controversial policing methods a topic of discussion in a local radio broadcast. After being asked about the variety of allegations against Darr, the chairman explained: [o]verzealous, controlling, uh, a lot of civil rights violations in my opinion, illegal searches and seizures, uh, trying to be an undercover cop, sitting in bars pretending he's a cable guy and trying to get information on the drug activity in town, uh, things of that nature. Appx., Vol. II, at 660 (errors in original). According to Darr, the airing of these false allegations impugned his reputation, honor, and integrity. On the contrary, Telluride contends that many of these complaints correspond to Darr's hard-nosed policing methods. For example, Telluride asserts that the chief marshal warned Darr that engaging in high-profile, aggressive, and overzealous policing would reduce Darr's effectiveness as a deputy. Aplee. Br. at 10. Following these several complaints and a well-known private citizen's complaint, which the citizen circulated to Telluride and the media, the chief marshal placed Darr on administrative leave pending the outcome of an investigation. Part of the investigation ultimately revealed that Darr violated a departmental rule requiring marshals to respect others. Appx., Vol. I, at 359. Specifically, there are grounds to believe that Deputy Darr was overbearing and rude in the execution of the first warning provided to [the citizen making the complaint]. Id. at 358. On July 21, 2003, the chief marshal sent Darr a letter terminating Darr's employment with Telluride. Id. at 389. The letter explained that although Darr had performed admirably on a number of fronts, there were other times when Darr's conduct resulted in counseling for less than acceptable performance. Id. Specifically, the chief was troubled by Darr's judgment, tone and demeanor when handling a search of a suspicious individual and a separate DUI investigation, during which Darr violated a departmental rule. Id. The chief also questioned Darr's judgment on other occasions: You have been aware that there has been an undercurrent of hostility developing toward you by certain segments of the community in recent months. This attitude has become particularly prevalent following [certain arrests you participated in]. In spite of this knowledge, you recently chose to socialize in a liquor establishment after completing an early-adjusted shift. Your plainclothes presence in the bar antagonized the owners of the establishment and they requested [that] you leave the premises. . . . I have to question the judgment that was used in your selection of the after-shift watering hole on this occasion. Instinctively, knowing what you know, I would like to think that better judgment would have prevailed. Id. at 390. Finally, the crux of the chief's decision seems to have been that Darr's overzealous policing methods had antagonized the community to the point where Darr could no longer effectively perform his job. The chief explained: I have stated repeatedly . . . that an aggressive and heavy-handed demeanor will not work in this community. Regrettably, a label has been attached to you in this regard. It is my belief that it is rendering your ability to effectively perform you [sic] role for the Marshal's Department non-existent, with no prospect of improvement. In addition, your actions have adversely affected the public perception of the Department and I am not optimistic that the situation will change. Id. Darr testified that he agreed with this assessment of his inability to effectively perform his duties in Telluride and that the chief marshal accurately described the public's perception: I believe I participated in that perception, but it wasn't solely mine. . . . Officer Merriman [participated in that perception as well.] Id. at 109. As explained above, Darr then filed this federal lawsuit, which the district court dismissed by granting Telluride's motion for summary judgment (thereby also dismissing Darr's state-law claims). This appeal followed.