Scott Drewry’s Lawsuit Shines A Light On Police Accountability

It’s been a long road for former Greybull police sergeant Scott Drewry, whose career unraveled after a messy series of investigations, firings, and one very pointed memo. Now, the Wyoming Supreme Court says at least part of his story isn’t over yet.

In a ruling issued this fall, the justices gave new life to Drewry’s breach of contract claim against his old boss, former Police Chief Bill Brenner, saying a jury should decide whether Brenner’s words violated a promise not to badmouth his former sergeant.

Here’s how the feud unfolded: Drewry joined the Greybull Police Department in 2016 but quickly found himself under scrutiny — first for allegedly fudging his education record, then for social visits while on duty and questionable training trips. By 2021, he was in deeper trouble after ordering a blood draw in a crash case before getting a warrant. Brenner investigated and moved to fire him. Instead, Drewry resigned under a settlement agreement that included a non-disparagement clause — basically, both sides agreed to keep their opinions to themselves.

But that truce didn’t last. A year later, Brenner sent out a memo to other law enforcement agencies warning that Drewry had “a history of deception” and should be kept away from Greybull cases. He even invoked Brady v. Maryland — the legal rule that forces prosecutors to share credibility issues about police witnesses — effectively branding Drewry as unreliable in court.

Drewry and his wife sued, claiming the memo shattered that settlement promise and defamed him. A lower court sided with Brenner, saying his comments were privileged and protected by qualified immunity.

The state’s high court mostly agreed — but not entirely. While the defamation and emotional distress claims were tossed for good, the justices said the phrase “the investigation” in the non-disparagement clause was ambiguous enough to warrant a closer look. In plain English: Was Brenner’s memo actually covered by that agreement, or not? That’s for a jury to decide.

So while most of the case is history, the contract claim lives on — a reminder that in small-town Wyoming law enforcement, grudges can have a surprisingly long legal afterlife.

And the ruling lands amid a growing statewide conversation about police credibility and transparency. From Cheyenne to Cody, Brady list disputes — cases where officers are flagged for possible dishonesty — have become a flashpoint between departments, prosecutors, and the public. The Drewry case doesn’t redefine those rules, but it highlights the gray zone where professional accountability meets personal reputation — and how, even years later, the fallout from one memo can still make its way to the state’s highest court.