Vincent Damon Ditirro v. Matthew J. Sando, et al.

Denver, Colorado civil rights lawyer represented Plaintiff, who sued Defendants for violating his rights under color of law in violation of Section 13-21-131(1), C.R.S. 2021.



1

¶ 1 In 2020, the Colorado General Assembly created a new cause

of action against "peace officers” for violation of a plaintiff's civil

rights. Section 13-21-131(1), C.R.S. 2021, allows a plaintiff to sue

a peace officer who, "under color of law, subject[ed] or caus[ed] [the

plaintiff] to be subjected, including failing to intervene,” to the

deprivation of an individual right that "create[s] binding obligations

on government actors secured by the bill of rights” embodied in the

Colorado Constitution.

¶ 2 The statute further provides that, under certain

circumstances, a peace officer found liable under section

13-21-131(1) is entitled to obtain indemnification from the peace

officer's employer. Section 13-21-131(4)(a) states that "a peace

officer's employer shall indemnify its peace officers for any liability

incurred by the peace officer and for any judgment or settlement

entered against the peace officer for claims arising pursuant to this

section,” except where "the peace officer's employer determines on a

case-by-case basis that the officer did not act upon a good faith and

reasonable belief that the action was lawful.”

¶ 3 The statute is silent, however, on whether a plaintiff has the

right to assert a direct claim against the employer of a peace officer

2

who violated one of the plaintiff's rights protected under the state

bill of rights.

¶ 4 We hold that, under the facts of this case, section 13-21-131

does not allow a plaintiff to file a direct action against the employer

of a peace officer. For this reason, we affirm the district court's

judgment dismissing the claims of plaintiff, Vincent Damon Ditirro,

against defendants Adams County Sheriff's Office (Adams County)

and Commerce City Police Department (Commerce City) under

C.R.C.P. 12(b)(5) for failure to state claims upon which relief can be

granted. (Ditirro's court filings, including his filings in this court,

refer to "Adams County Sheriff's Department.” The correct name of

that entity is "Adams County Sheriff's Office.” We use the entity's

correct name in this opinion.)

¶ 5 In addition, we reject Ditirro's other arguments and award

appellate attorney fees to the four original defendants that

requested such a fee award: Commerce City, Colorado State Patrol

(CSP) troopers Matthew J. Sando and Caleb Simon, and CSP. We

also grant Commerce City's request for an award of its costs

incurred in this appeal.



See: https://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Court_of_Appeals/Opinion/2022/21CA0739-PD.pdf

The judgment in favor of Adams County and Commerce City is

affirmed. The orders denying Ditirro’s motion for leave to amend

his first amended complaint and denying his motion for

reconsideration are also affirmed. The case is remanded to the

district court for a determination of the amount of reasonable

appellate attorney fees and costs to be awarded, as explained above.