Thomas James Dorn v. VERNA CARPENTER, Judge; JEFFERSON COUNTY COURT; CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
_________________________________
THOMAS JAMES DORN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
VERNA CARPENTER, Judge;
JEFFERSON COUNTY COURT; CITY
AND COUNTY OF DENVER,
Defendants - Appellees.
No. 21-1298
(D.C. No. 1:20-CV-02103-RM-KLM)
(D. Colo.)
_________________________________
ORDER AND JUDGMENT*
_________________________________
Before MATHESON, BRISCOE, and PHILLIPS, Circuit Judges.
_________________________________
Proceeding pro se, Appellant Thomas Dorn filed a series of suits against the
City and County of Denver, Jefferson County Court, and Jefferson County District
Court Judge Verna Carpenter. 1 The suits were consolidated in the District of
Colorado before a magistrate judge. The magistrate judge issued a report and
* After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined
unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of
this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore
ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding
precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral
estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with
Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.
1 As a pro se litigant, we liberally construe Dorn’s filings, Erickson v. Pardus,
551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007), without acting as his advocate, Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d
1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1991).
FILED
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
January 20, 2022
Christopher M. Wolpert
Clerk of Court
Appellate Case: 21-1298 Document: 010110634614 Date Filed: 01/20/2022 Page: 1

-- 1 of 3 --

2
recommendation (“Recommendation”) finding that Dorn’s consolidated suit failed
for a variety of reasons, with two threshold reasons being the Colorado Governmental
Immunity Act (“CGIA”) and Eleventh Amendment immunity.
Specifically, the Recommendation found that the suit against all defendants
failed under the CGIA because the CGIA bars “all claims for injury which lie in tort
or could lie in tort[.]” See Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-10-106(1). Dorn sought to recover
for such injuries. The Recommendation also found that the claims against Jefferson
County Court and Judge Carpenter failed under the Eleventh Amendment because the
Amendment precludes federal jurisdiction over state officials acting in their official
capacities. See, e.g., Bishop v. John Doe 1, 902 F.2d 809, 810 (10th Cir. 1990) (“The
eleventh amendment generally bars lawsuits in federal court seeking damages against
states as well as against state agencies, departments, and employees acting in their
official capacity.”).
The Recommendation was thorough, and the district judge adopted it in full
despite Dorn’s objections. Dorn’s brief identifies no legal errors in the decision
below and we see none either. Therefore, reviewing his arguments de novo and
Appellate Case: 21-1298 Document: 010110634614 Date Filed: 01/20/2022 Page: 2

-- 2 of 3 --

3
exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm the judgment. 2
Entered for the Court
Gregory A. Phillips
Circuit Judge
2 Dorn sent the court an untitled document on January 12, 2022 that we have
construed as a reply brief. But the deadline to file a reply was December 13, 2021, so
we decline to consider it.
Appellate Case: 21-1298 Document: 010110634614 Date Filed: 01/20/2022 Page: 3

-- 3 of 3 --