Fired Nebraska State Patrol captain says agency didn't follow policy, retaliated (2025)

LINCOLN — A former Nebraska State Patrol captain who oversaw the agency’s professional standards division has filed a lawsuit against the patrol and its leader for not following policy when it fired him.

In November 2022, Matthew Sutter was fired after sharing information with an Omaha TV reporter about 2019 visits from then-President Donald Trump and Vice President Mike Pence.

“It is true Mr. Sutter did not have any prior discipline,” Erik Fern, assistant attorney general representing the State Patrol, said during a hearing Monday in district court on the lawsuit. “It is also deeply unfortunate that he made this egregious error in judgment.”

Sutter became a trooper in 2007 and was promoted multiple times during his tenure. In 2010, he was assigned to the executive protection division for the governor. Five years later, he was promoted to sergeant and then lieutenant in 2018 before reaching the rank of captain in 2019, where he was assigned to professional standards, also known as internal affairs.

Sutter’s attorney, Megan Shupe, argued that his discipline was not made for just cause or in good faith and that his right to due process was violated.

The State Patrol has a policy about the news media. At the time it stated, “Any employee found providing agency information to a media source without approval from their chain of command may be subject to dismissal.”

The head of the State Patrol, Col. John Bolduc, testified at a patrol grievance hearing over Sutter’s termination in September 2023 that he did not authorize the release of any information related to the presidential or vice presidential visits.

However, Sutter argued that information about the visit was available to the public when he disclosed it.

During Monday’s hearing, Shupe cited a 1966 arbitration case that uses seven questions to determine whether termination is warranted. To qualify, all answers need to be yes.

Shupe argued that the answer to several questions should have been no, including:

Besides there being no just cause for Sutter’s termination, Shupe argued standard operating procedures were being changed and amended while the investigation against Sutter was taking place.

Shupe said the patrol’s hearing officer found the agency violated its own policies concerning Sutter.

Fern told District Court Judge Andrew Jacobsen on Monday that even though the hearing officer used the just cause standard Shupe cited, the court is not bound to use the same standard.

“So what standard of good cause are you arguing that I use?” Jacobsen asked.

Fern said the judge should use the one adopted by the Nebraska Supreme Court in 2003.

“In this context, good cause for dismissal is that which a reasonable employer acting in good faith would regard as sufficient reason for terminating the services of an employee as distinguished from an arbitrary one,” he said.

Shupe also said there was evidence of retaliation against Sutter, citing testimony provided by Sutter about two disagreements with Bolduc that resulted in him being reassigned and receiving poor work evaluations. Sutter had not previously received poor work evaluations.

The State Patrol investigated Sutter after other unfounded allegations against him until they found something they could discipline him for, Shupe said.

Because of his rank, the State Patrol believes he should be held to a higher standard, Fern said.

“(Sutter) was not a person low on the hierarchy. He was the captain of the Office of Professional Responsibility and Standards for Nebraska State Patrol,” he said.

During the patrol’s grievance hearing, Bolduc said maybe two people in the agency had more access to confidential information.

“He was placed in a significant area of trust, and he breached that trust,” Fern said.

Jacobsen is taking the arguments made Monday under advisement.

Sutter is seeking reinstatement, backpay and his attorney fees to be covered.

In September Sutter filed a second lawsuit in District Court against the State of Nebraska about a culture of retaliation at the State Patrol.

In April 2019, Sutter reported an inappropriate relationship between a high-ranking patrol officer and someone working for the legal team who counsels the agency, a violation of patrol policy.

According to the complaint, Sutter reported the relationship to his superiors, but when he later checked, the Nebraska Equal Opportunity Commission said no such report was made by those superiors.

Later, two lieutenants and a captain acknowledged Sutter reported the inappropriate relationship, the court records show.

Also in 2019, Sutter said a State Patrol captain raised concerns the agency was unlawfully spending carrier enforcement funds on expenses not related to the carrier enforcement division and sent an email to troopers and legal counsel about the issue.

A short time later, the captain who raised the concern was removed from his position after being accused of knowing and not properly handling an allegation that an employee under his command was reportedly addicted to painkillers.

Eventually, the patrol cleared the captain of any wrongdoing but not before he had been reassigned, according to Sutter’s court filing.

Sutter’s lawsuit also details a March 2020 case in which a lieutenant with the State Patrol was investigating a captain who had at least 30 employees accuse him of bullying, abuse and threatening them.

The investigation found three of five allegations against the captain were verified and showed unprofessional conduct in the workplace. But, those findings were dismissed by a higher-ranking State Patrol official.

In the complaint, Sutter says Bolduc told him the investigation opened the agency up to liability, which had been avoided to that point.