RIDGELY, Md. - A federal judge has dismissed all federal claims brought by eight former Ridgely Police Department employees who accused Ridgely and Caroline County officials of orchestrating the department’s disbandment in 2024.
In a memorandum opinion filed on Friday, Sept. 25, 2026, U.S. District Judge Brendan A. Hurson granted motions to dismiss filed by the Town of Ridgely and several town officials, as well as Caroline County Sheriff Donald Baker Jr. and Deputy Sheriff Rodney Helmer. The ruling comes over a year after the former officers filed their lawsuit alleging violations of their constitutional rights, defamation, and conspiracy, among other claims.
The lawsuit was filed in August 2025 by former Ridgely Police Chief Jeffrey Eckrich and seven other former department employees. As WBOC previously reported, the plaintiffs alleged former Ridgely officer James Joles and Baker devised a plan to eliminate the town’s police department and allow the Caroline County Sheriff’s Office to take over law enforcement services.
The lawsuit described the alleged effort as a “coup” and claimed the former employees were suspended and ultimately removed from their positions without receiving notice of the allegations against them or an opportunity to defend themselves.
Ridgely Police suspension
The legal saga first began with an investigation into the Ridgely Police Department in March of 2024 by the Maryland Office of the State Prosecutor.
According to court documents, allegations against then-Chief Eckrich included claims of perjury, misconduct in office, improper disposal of town property, and falsified payroll records. Ridgely commissioners suspended the department’s employees with pay while the investigation was underway, and the town subsequently entered into an agreement with the Caroline County Sheriff’s Office to provide law enforcement services.
The Office of the State Prosecutor concluded its investigation that July. A redacted report later obtained by WBOC said investigators did not find sufficient evidence of criminal activity to warrant further investigation or prosecution.
Despite those findings, Ridgely did not reestablish its police department. Town officials instead continued using the Sheriff's Office for law enforcement services.
Judge rejects federal due process claims
Central to the former police employees' lawsuit were claims that the town violated their constitutional right to due process when it suspended and later terminated them.
Judge Hurson found the plaintiffs had adequately alleged a protected property interest related to their suspensions. However, the judge ruled that because the employees were suspended with pay, the suspensions did not deprive them of that property interest in a way that violated federal due process.
“Because the complaint alleges that the RPD employees were suspended with pay given the pending OSP investigation,” Hurson wrote, the allegations did not support a claim that the defendants deprived them of their property interest without due process.
The court separately considered the employees' eventual terminations.
According to the opinion, Ridgely commissioners decided to eliminate the police department after entering into the law enforcement agreement with the Sheriff's Office. The court determined the plaintiffs' termination resulted from that broader administrative and budgetary decision rather than individual disciplinary action against the officers for misconduct.
The federal judge thus found the former employees had not adequately showed that Maryland laws requiring certain procedures before removing municipal officers for misconduct applied to their terminations.
“Coup” allegations fall short of federal standard
The former employees also claimed the defendants' actions amounted to a substantive due process violation, alleging officials used false accusations as part of an intentional effort to eliminate RPD.
The court did not determine whether every allegation underlying the dispute was true or false. Instead, Hurson found the facts alleged in the complaint did not rise to the level necessary to establish a federal substantive due process violation.
The judge pointed to the ongoing State Prosecutor investigation and Ridgely's agreement with the Sheriff's Office as governmental interests supporting the town's actions at the time. The opinion also found exhibits attached to the lawsuit undermined some of the plaintiffs' allegations that town commissioners improperly used accusations aimed only at Eckrich to justify suspending the entire department.
The court also dismissed the former employees' federal defamation-related claim. Hurson found Ridgely's public statements generally said the department had been suspended pending a State Prosecutor investigation and did not specifically accuse each individual employee of criminal wrongdoing.
Because the court found the plaintiffs had not adequately alleged an underlying federal constitutional violation, their federal civil conspiracy and municipal liability claims were also dismissed.
State claims could continue
The ruling does not necessarily bring the legal dispute to an end.
After dismissing the federal claims, Judge Hurson declined to exercise jurisdiction over the remaining claims brought under Maryland law, including state constitutional, defamation, and tortious interference claims.
Those claims were dismissed without prejudice, meaning the federal judge did not decide their merits and the former Ridgely employees could still pursue them in state court.
