Charlotte Noelle Sweeney

United States District Court for the District of Colorado district Appointed by Joe Biden (Democratic) 4 signed orders read

How Judge Sweeney decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

She imposes evidentiary spoliation sanctions where a party intentionally destroys evidence, barring a defense theory and shifting fees.

“the Court ADOPTS WITH MODIFICATIONS, as outlined above, Magistrate Judge Braswell's Recommendation on Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions, ECF No. 89, and grants in part and denies in part Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions, ECF No. 61.”

Procedural preferences

Sweeney frequently hears oral argument and rules from the bench on summary judgment, parsing employment claims one by one and preserving viable claims (for example, denying summary judgment on a failure-to-accommodate claim while granting it on disability-discrimination and retaliation claims).

“ORDERED: [23] Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 56 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; granted as to the discrimination claim based on disability and retaliation, denied as to the failure to accommodate claim.”

Cautions

On aggressive pro se post-judgment practice she denies omnibus Rule 59/60 motions in full: recusal under 28 U.S.C. 455 is purely objective and adverse rulings are grounds for appeal not recusal, Rule 60 cannot be used to relitigate the merits, and a complaint cannot be amended until the judgment is vacated.

“Plaintiff's Opposed Motion for Revocation of Final Judgement [sic], Recusal of Magistrate Judge and District Court Judge, Leave to File Fourth Amended Complaint, and Request for Advisement to Defendants is DENIED in its entirety (ECF No. 77).”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Freeman v. Raytheon Technologies Corporation
1:22-cv-01161-CNS-NRN · 2023-06-28
Motion for relief from judgment (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiff's Opposed Motion for Revocation of Final Judgement [sic], Recusal of Magistrate Judge and District Court Judge, Leave to File Fourth Amended Complaint, and Request for Advisement to Defendants is DENIED in its entirety (ECF No. 77).”

Butler v. State of Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment
1:22-cv-01705-CNS-KLM · 2023-11-07
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“ORDERED: [52] Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.”

Inen v. The University of Colorado
1:23-cv-02896-CNS-NRN · 2025-01-15
Summary judgment (defendant) Granted in part

“ORDERED: [23] Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment Pursuant to F.R.C.P. 56 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; granted as to the discrimination claim based on disability and retaliation, denied as to the failure to accommodate claim.”

Salama v. City of Pueblo
1:23-cv-01663-CNS-MDB · 2026-02-05
Motion for sanctions (plaintiff) Granted in part

“the Court ADOPTS WITH MODIFICATIONS, as outlined above, Magistrate Judge Braswell's Recommendation on Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions, ECF No. 89, and grants in part and denies in part Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions, ECF No. 61.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Two terminated civil-case durations are available, a small set for a judge commissioned in 2022. The contested cases reviewed were reassigned to her on appointment and decided on the merits, so they reflect her rulings even though they were filed shortly before she took the bench.

Put Judge Sweeney's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Sweeney actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Sweeney's own signed orders and cites them.