FOLLOW US

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has reopened a case accusing an Okanogan County sheriff’s deputy of coercing a woman he once arrested into a years-long sexual relationship, ruling that each alleged act of misconduct reset the statute of limitations.

In a unanimous decision Tuesday, the three-judge panel revived Christina St. Clair’s lawsuit alleging discrimination, harassment under Washington’s Law Against Discrimination, and civil rights violations under the 14th Amendment by Deputy Sheriff Isaiah Holloway and the county itself.

From Dismissal to Revival

U.S. District Judge Thomas O. Rice had dismissed St. Clair’s case in February 2024, citing Washington’s three-year statute of limitations. St. Clair claimed the coercion began in 2014, but she filed her lawsuit in September 2023.

The Ninth Circuit, however, pointed to allegations that Holloway’s misconduct continued until 2021. That meant, judges ruled, that claims from after September 2020 remain within the statutory window.

Circuit Judge M. Margaret McKeown, writing for the panel, stressed that each incident stood on its own:

“Had Holloway made no sexual overtures until 2020, those acts would surely be independent violations.”

McKeown warned that forcing victims to lump separate incidents together under a single time bar would wrongly shield ongoing abusers.

Claims Against the County Strengthened

The panel also reinstated older claims, finding St. Clair plausibly alleged that her addiction, Holloway’s power as an officer, and fear of legal jeopardy delayed her recognition of the abuse.

St. Clair said Holloway pressured her into sex at least 20 times between 2014 and 2021, often using texts and video calls. She alleged she could not refuse because he had arrested her before, knew about her drug use, and claimed knowledge of uncharged crimes.

Her complaint also alleged that her uncle reported the misconduct as early as 2014, yet the county merely warned Holloway without ensuring compliance. The Ninth Circuit noted that a 2019 audit flagged systemic failures in handling complaints, strengthening the claim of county indifference.

“It was an abuse of discretion to dismiss this claim without leave to amend,” McKeown wrote, allowing St. Clair to refine her allegations.

A Broader Pattern of Neglect

According to the opinion, the sheriff’s office allegedly ignored not only Holloway’s conduct but also misconduct by three other deputies. This, the court said, “alleges a cognizable pattern” of failing to address sexual misconduct within the department.

Attorney Tyler Hotchkiss, representing St. Clair, called the ruling “a decision beneficial to both Ms. St. Clair and similarly situated vulnerable women.”