Because former Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff never filed an opening brief after obtaining two extensions, the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday dismissed his lawsuit seeking $80 million against officials who investigated him in one of Utah’s biggest scandals.
It also prompted a rebuke from John W. Huber, the U.S. attorney for Utah.
“The State of Utah’s former top law enforcement official cast strongly worded accusations against federal and state law enforcement agents in his lawsuit. In truth, these agents exercised professionalism and discretion in their investigation of Mr. Shurtleff,” Huber wrote in a statement.
“The United States District Court dismissed the lawsuit, and the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals has now appropriately terminated Mr. Shurtleff’s appeal,” he added.
Also, Salt Lake County District Attorney Sim Gill, named as a defendant in the lawsuit, praised its dismissal. “It was a frivolous lawsuit without merit,” he said. “The process worked as it should.”
The court issued a terse order on Tuesday saying, “This appeal is dismissed for lack of prosecution.”
Last year, U.S. federal district Judge Clark Waddoups initially dismissed the case by Shurtleff, finding those who investigated and charged him with public corruption seven years ago can’t be sued for doing their jobs.
Shurtleff was at the center of one of Utah’s most sweeping political scandals, though in 2016, all criminal charges against him were dismissed.
He accepted a $600,000 settlement with the state over the legal fees he accrued while fighting the charges. But that didn’t end the litigation that Shurtleff filed in federal court against Salt Lake County District Attorney Sim Gill and other various state and federal law enforcement agencies that investigated him and his successor, John Swallow, on corruption-related allegations.
Shurtleff’s alleged that even though charges were dropped, the damage remained. Shurtleff's arrest, the search and seizure of his property and his prosecution caused humiliation and other pain and suffering, he wrote.
Shurtleff initially sought $60 million in his civil lawsuit, then upped it to $80 million after amending it.
But Waddoups ruled in the lower court wrote that Shurtleff did not show how federal agents used excessive force during a search of home, saying that a SWAT team serving a warrant signed by a judge is not inherently excessive.
And the judge further ruled that Shurtleff didn’t prove that he was arrested and charged without probable cause, a legal standard which means that there is sufficient evidence to show that a crime was likely committed by someone.
This means that police and prosecutors were covered by the “doctrine of qualified immunity,” Waddoups wrote — in other words, they can’t be sued for doing their jobs.
