Colorado Court of Appeals Rules in Favor of Former Student in Service Animal Case Against Colorado Mesa University

The Colorado Court of Appeals made a groundbreaking ruling last week, declaring that Colorado Mesa University was in the wrong for questioning a former student’s disability and insisting on documentation for his service animal. This decision sets a legal precedent for how such issues are defined under federal and state accessibility and discrimination laws.

The case began in early 2021 when CMU student Dustin Stalder brought his service dog, Ruger, into a gym on campus. Stalder had been training Ruger to assist him with his post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and depression. However, university officials questioned whether Ruger was a service dog or an emotional support animal, leading to Stalder being barred from bringing Ruger into the gym.

Stalder filed a lawsuit alleging violations of the Americans With Disabilities Act and the Colorado Anti-Discrimination Act. District Judge Matthew Barrett initially dismissed the case, citing the university’s “legitimate suspicions” about Stalder’s disability and his dog’s training. However, a three-judge panel of the appeals court overturned this decision, stating that the “legitimate suspicions” doctrine does not apply to the ADA or state anti-discrimination laws.

The court emphasized that there are no specific requirements for the amount or type of training a service animal must undergo, and there is no need for certification from a professional trainer. Stalder demonstrated that Ruger was trained to assist him with his mental health issues, including removing him from triggering situations and providing pressure therapy.

CMU argued that they had the right to question whether Ruger was a trained service animal, but the appeals court disagreed, citing the ADA’s restrictions on inquiries about a person’s disability or their service animal. The court highlighted that a public entity cannot require documentation or certification for a service animal.

Despite Stalder’s claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress, the court found little evidence to support this allegation. Stalder was a student at CMU from 2019 to 2022.

This ruling marks a significant victory for individuals with disabilities and their service animals, clarifying the rights and protections afforded to them under the law.