Caplan & Earnest Secures Tenth Circuit Victory for Denver Health’s ‘Denver CARES’ Program

Caplan & Earnest has secured a favorable appellate ruling on behalf of Denver Health’s Denver Community Addiction Rehabilitation and Evaluation Services (Denver CARES) program and several members of its staff. Caplan attorney Elliott Hood was lead counsel on the appeal and delivered oral argument. He was joined on the briefs by colleague Stu Stuller.  

In its order and judgment, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit alleging that Denver CARES and its personnel violated a former client’s Fourth Amendment rights by detaining him overnight while he sobered up.  

The plaintiff arrived at Denver CARES after police responded to a reported altercation and transferred him to an emergency service patrol. A breath test administered during admission showed a blood alcohol level of 0.196. Denver CARES discharged him shortly after his estimated sober time.  

The plaintiff later filed suit against the facility and individual staff members asserting federal constitutional and state-law claims. The U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado dismissed the federal claims after concluding that the complaint did not plausibly allege a constitutional violation. The plaintiff appealed.  

Tenth Circuit Affirms Dismissal  

A three-judge Tenth Circuit panel affirmed the district court’s decision, agreeing that the circumstances supported probable cause to detain the plaintiff for alcohol intoxication. The court also concluded that no new information arose during his stay that required Denver CARES to release him earlier.  

Because the plaintiff did not plausibly allege an underlying constitutional violation, his claims against the individual defendants and Denver CARES could not proceed. One judge concurred in the judgment on qualified-immunity grounds, finding that the plaintiff had not identified clearly established precedent requiring facility personnel to administer another breath test before continuing to detain an intoxicated person. 

The matter is Garrett v. Denver C.A.R.E.S., et al., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, Case No. 24-1363.