Monroe County employee lawsuits: Judge dismisses one complaint, leaves open narrow wrongful termination question

On Wednesday (Jan. 7), a circuit court judge completely dismissed one lawsuit against Monroe County officials, but allowed a question of wrongful termination to proceed in a second one. Both cases were filed by former Monroe County employee Lisa Jeneé Trimble.

The cases had already been dismissed in September 2025 for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. But Trimble exercised her right to file amended complaints. It’s the amended complaints on which special judge Luke Rudisill ruled this week. Trimble is representing herself.

The complaint that is now dismissed in its entirety was against a raft of defendants, and made a broad range of allegations involving: workplace harassment by the county assessor; inaction by employee services and the legal department; defamation by the county auditor; misuse of authority; false allegations about misuse of county equipment; health impacts; and a failure to investigate complaints in a timely way, among other claims.

The second complaint on which Rudisill ruled this week stemmed from Trimble’s termination from her job with the auditor’s office in May 2025.

Trimble alleged she was fired in retaliation for reporting what she believed were violations of Indiana law related to property assessments. Her lawsuit named as defendants Monroe County government, the Monroe County commissioners, and auditor Brianne Gregory, both as an individual and in her official role.

In his order issued Wednesday (Jan. 7), Rudisill, the special judge, did not make a blanket ruling. He granted part of the motion by defendants for dismissal and denied part of it.

Rudisill dismissed all claims against Monroe County government and the county commissioners, concluding they were not proper defendants in the case. The judge also dismissed Gregory as a defendant in her individual capacity, finding that the allegations made by Trimble concerned actions taken within Gregory’s official role as auditor.

As a result, the only remaining defendant is Gregory in her official capacity as Monroe County auditor, and the title of the case is supposed to be amended accordingly.

Most of Trimble’s legal claims were also dismissed. The court threw out allegations based on negligence, bullying, harassment, and other theories, leaving only a single claim: wrongful termination.

The judge is allowing the wrongful termination claim to remain alive because, at this early stage of the case, the judge found Trimble had alleged enough to proceed under a narrow exception to Indiana’s employment-at-will doctrine. Indiana law generally allows employers to terminate employees for any reason—or no reason at all—but prohibits firing an employee solely for exercising a statutory right, such as reporting suspected misconduct.

Trimble reported to the Department of Local Government Finance (DLGF) what she believed to be malfeasance on the part of the assessor.

In his order, Rudisill emphasized that the statute in question protects the right to report suspected malfeasance, not just wrongdoing that is later proven. Because of that distinction, the judge declined to treat as decisive a finding from the DLGF, which concluded Trimble’s allegations were not substantiated.

The judge also rejected arguments that Trimble had already conceded her termination was based on reasons unrelated to whistleblowing. While the defendants alleged other grounds for her firing, the judge said it was too early in the case to treat those assertions as established fact.

The judge noted that Trimble has not proved her claim that the defendants pressured the auditor to terminate her employment. But he concluded her allegations were sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss and proceed to the next phase of litigation.

The judge’s ruling this week did not determine whether Trimble was wrongfully terminated. It means only that the case can continue, now narrowed to a single defendant and a single legal theory.

Likely next to appear on the docket is a formal answer from Gregory, the auditor, to the surviving complaint, and then possibly a conference to set deadlines for the fact-finding part of the case.