## Facts

- UTOPIA, a Utah state agency focused on high-speed internet infrastructure, retained Chris Hogan as a consultant starting in 2008 under a professional services agreement.
- Hogan asserted he reported a conflict of interest in UTOPIA contract awards and was terminated in retaliation; he threatened to sue for wrongful termination.
- After he announced intent to sue, multiple critical articles about Hogan appeared, discussing his job performance, termination dispute, and litigation threats; some characterized his threats as “extortion” or “blackmail.”
- One early article was authored pseudonymously by Michael K. Winder, the mayor of West Valley City, where UTOPIA conducted significant business.
- Hogan alleged Winder, governmental actors, and media-related defendants coordinated publication and dissemination to damage his reputation and deter him from pursuing legal remedies.
- Hogan sued for defamation, false-light invasion of privacy, intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED), and federal civil-rights claims under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1985, including claims seeking to impose liability on West Valley City and UTOPIA.
- The district court dismissed all claims under Rule 12(b)(6), and Hogan appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the articles contained actionable false statements supporting defamation and false-light claims under Utah law when read in context.
2. Whether publication of the articles constituted “outrageous” conduct and severe harm sufficient for IIED under Utah law.
3. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged state action and a constitutional deprivation under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 based on the authorship and dissemination of the articles.
4. Whether the complaint plausibly alleged a civil-rights conspiracy under 42 U.S.C. § 1985.
5. Whether municipal/public-entity liability was adequately pleaded by identifying an official policy or custom causing the alleged injury.

## Decision

- The Tenth Circuit affirmed dismissal of all claims.
- The court held the articles were not actionable as defamation or false light when evaluated in their full context, including the rhetorical framing of “extortion” or “blackmail.”
- The court held the alleged conduct did not satisfy Utah’s demanding IIED standard.
- The court held the § 1983 claims failed because the complaint did not plausibly plead action under color of state law, and reputational injury alone did not establish a constitutional violation.
- The court held the § 1985 conspiracy allegations were conclusory and insufficiently supported by factual allegations.
- The court held municipal/public-entity liability failed because Hogan did not allege an official policy or custom (or comparable basis) that caused a constitutional injury.

## Legal Principles

- Allegedly defamatory statements must be evaluated in context; sharp characterizations in reporting on public disputes may be treated as nonactionable opinion or rhetorical hyperbole rather than verifiable assertions of criminal conduct.
- False-light liability under Utah law requires a misleading portrayal that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person; contextual meaning can defeat false-light claims even where the plaintiff alleges reputational harm.
- Utah IIED requires extreme and outrageous conduct and severe emotional distress; publication of nonactionable criticism about a public controversy generally does not meet that threshold.
- A § 1983 claim requires plausible allegations that defendants acted under color of state law; a public official’s speech does not constitute state action absent facts showing use or misuse of official authority.
- Reputational injury, without a change in legal status or a more tangible deprivation of a protected interest, does not by itself state a federal constitutional claim.
- A § 1985 conspiracy claim requires specific factual allegations of an agreement to violate protected rights; conclusory assertions of coordination are insufficient.
- Municipal liability under Monell requires identification of an official policy, custom, or decision by a final policymaker that caused the constitutional injury; isolated acts not tied to a policy or custom do not suffice.

## Conclusion

The Tenth Circuit affirmed dismissal at the pleading stage because the challenged publications were not actionable under Utah tort law when read in context, and the complaint did not plausibly allege state action, a cognizable constitutional deprivation, a fact-based conspiracy, or an official municipal/public-entity policy causing the claimed harm.


Hogan v. Winder, 762 F.3d 1096 (10th Cir. 2014)