Wyoming Pushes to Throw Out Lawsuit Tying Prison Leaders to Guard’s Sexual Assault

The Wyoming Attorney General’s Office is asking a federal judge to toss out a lawsuit that accuses top officials at the state’s only women’s prison of failing to protect an inmate from a guard who later admitted to sexually assaulting her, Casper Star Tribune reports.

In a motion filed Saturday, the state argued that the case against current and former leaders at the Wyoming Women’s Center in Lusk doesn’t hold up legally, was brought too late, and can’t be heard in federal court at all.

“Consequently, the State Defendants should be dismissed from this action,” the filing says.

The lawsuit was filed in August by Chasity Jacobs, one of several women who say they were sexually abused by correctional officers at the Wyoming Women’s Center.

Since 2020, three former guards at the prison have been convicted of sexually assaulting female inmates. One of them is Joseph Gaul, hired in 2019, who later pleaded guilty to second-degree sexual assault against Jacobs in 2023. He was sentenced to two to five years in prison and is eligible for parole this October, according to the Wyoming Department of Corrections.

Jacobs’ lawsuit claims that what happened to her wasn’t just the work of one bad guard, but the result of a systemic failure by prison leadership — especially Warden Timothy Lang and Associate Warden Robert Harty.

Her complaint says prison officials knew about “the pervasive problem of sexual assault by WWC correctional officers” and still failed to fix obvious breakdowns in hiring, training, reporting and accountability that allowed abuse to keep happening.

The lawsuit also points out that before Gaul was hired in Wyoming, he had allegedly been fired from at least two public-sector jobs in Nebraska for misconduct toward women. Jacobs argues that should have been a glaring red flag in any reasonable hiring process.

Jacobs is suing under two main legal theories:

• Federal civil rights claims under Section 1983, arguing her constitutional rights were violated when a state employee sexually assaulted her and when leaders failed to prevent it.
• A state-law negligence claim under the Wyoming Governmental Claims Act (WGCA), accusing Lang and Harty of failing to protect her from known risks and a pattern of abuse.

She argues that prison leadership knew or should have known about prior incidents, ignored warning signs, and failed to put basic safeguards in place to protect women in custody.

The Attorney General’s Office, representing Lang and Harty, is pushing back on almost every legal front.

In its motion to dismiss, the state claims:

1. The federal court doesn’t have jurisdiction
   The filing leans heavily on the 11th Amendment, which limits when states can be sued in federal court. The attorney general argues that:

   • The women’s prison, as a state agency, is immune from lawsuits in federal court seeking either money damages or injunctions.

   • Claims that effectively target the state itself can’t go forward under federal law.

2. Lang and Harty aren’t proper defendants under Section 1983
   The motion says the warden and associate warden, when sued in their official roles, “are not ‘persons’ subject” to lawsuits under Section 1983 — a technical but important argument often raised by states in civil rights cases.

3. No proof of deliberate wrongdoing
   Even if the case could proceed, the state says Jacobs hasn’t shown that Lang or Harty personally acted with “deliberate indifference” to her rights — a key standard in constitutional claims involving prison officials.

   The motion notes:

   • Jacobs mentions a specific act — the hiring of Gaul — but doesn’t clearly allege that Lang or Harty actually made that hiring decision.

   • She also doesn’t claim they knew about Gaul’s alleged prior misconduct in Nebraska, which the state says is necessary to show a culpable state of mind.

“In other words, it is not enough that either Lang or Harty acted in a supervisory role when Gaul violated the plaintiff’s constitutional rights,” the filing argues.

4. The state-law claim was filed too late
   On the Wyoming Governmental Claims Act claim, the state says Jacobs missed a key deadline.

   According to the motion:

   • The last sexual assault alleged in the lawsuit happened on July 24, 2023.

   • Under the WGCA, Jacobs had two years — until July 24, 2025 — to file a notice of claim with the correct state office.

   • Because Lang and Harty are state employees, that notice should have gone to the general services division of the Department of Administration and Information.

When Jacobs’ lawyers filed the lawsuit in August, they attached a notice of claim dated July 21, 2025, addressed to the Wyoming Department of Corrections, the Attorney General, Lang and Harty. The state now argues that wasn’t enough to satisfy the statute’s technical requirements.

In a brief response to the lawsuit filed on September 30, Gaul, 46, said he had not yet secured an attorney to represent him in the civil case.

Lang and Harty, on the other hand, are being represented by the Wyoming Attorney General’s Office, underscoring that the state is backing its prison leadership as they fight the claims.

It’s now up to a federal judge in Wyoming to decide whether:

• The case can move forward at all in federal court;
• The claims against Lang and Harty can stand under Section 1983;
• Jacobs properly followed state procedures and deadlines under the Wyoming Governmental Claims Act.

For Jacobs and other women who say they were abused at the Wyoming Women’s Center, the outcome will determine whether they get a chance to press their claims in front of a jury — or whether the state’s legal shields will stop the case at the courthouse door.