UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS February 15, 2022

Christopher M. Wolpert FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Clerk of Court _________________________________

TIFFANY LITZSINGER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v. No. 21-1106

ADAMS COUNTY CORONER’S OFFICE,

Defendant - Appellee. _________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado (D.C. No. 1:20-CV-00989-MEH) _________________________________

Robert M. Liechty, Robert M. Leichty, PC, Denver, Colorado, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Michael A. Sink, Assistant County Attorney, Adams County Attorney’s Office, Brighton, Colorado (Heidi Miller, County Attorney, and Scott Blaha, Assistant County Attorney, Adams County Attorney’s Office, Brighton, Colorado, on the brief) for Defendant- Appellee. _________________________________

Before TYMKOVICH, Chief Judge, HARTZ, and MATHESON, Circuit Judges. _________________________________

TYMKOVICH, Chief Judge. _________________________________

Tiffany Litzsinger worked for the Adams County Coroner’s Office from

2013 until she was terminated in 2018. During her employment with the Appellate Case: 21-1106 Document: 010110645319 Date Filed: 02/15/2022 Page: 2

Coroner’s Office, Litzsinger suffered from anxiety and depression, both of which

worsened in the months leading up to her termination. After an anxiety episode,

Adams County granted Litzsinger temporary leave under the Family and Medical

Leave Act (FMLA). When Litzsinger returned from her FMLA leave, the

Coroner placed Litzsinger on probation for myriad violations of workplace

policies. Shortly after Litzsinger’s probation began, the Coroner terminated

Litzsinger for violating the terms of her probation. Litzsinger sued the Adams

County Coroner’s Office under the FMLA and Americans with Disabilities Act

(ADA), claiming the Coroner terminated her in retaliation for exercising her

rights under both statutes. The district court granted summary judgment for the

Coroner’s Office because Litzsinger failed to demonstrate that the Coroner’s

reason for terminating her was pretextual.

Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm. We conclude

that a rational jury could not find that the Coroner’s proffered reason for firing

Litzsinger was pretextual.

I. Background

Because this case arises from an appeal of summary judgment, we present

the following factual background in the light most favorable to Litzsinger as the

non-moving party, unless contradicted by the record. See Smothers v. Solvay

Chemicals, Inc., 740 F.3d 530, 533 (10th Cir. 2014).

Litzsinger served as a medicolegal death investigator for the Adams County

Coroner’s Office from January 2013 until September 2018. During her 2 Appellate Case: 21-1106 Document: 010110645319 Date Filed: 02/15/2022 Page: 3

employment, Litzsinger’s primary supervisors were Chief Coroner Monica

Broncucia-Jordan (the Coroner) and Chief Deputy Coroner Sherronda Appleberry

(the Chief Deputy Coroner).

A. Mental Health Treatment

Litzsinger began seeing a counselor for anxiety and depression in 2012, the

year before she began working for the Coroner’s Office. During her employment

with the Coroner’s Office, Litzsinger regularly visited the counselor for mental

health assistance. Litzsinger’s supervisors were aware that Litzsinger struggled

with anxiety and asked her on several occasions whether she needed

Click Here to Read the rest of this document