25 results for 'cat:"Employment" AND cat:"Employment Retaliation" AND cat:"First Amendment"'.
J. Korman rules in favor of a former hearing officer on his First Amendment retaliation claim, finding the New York State's Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance violated his constitutional rights when it suspended him without pay and reassigned him to a different position after discovering comments he made disparaging certain aspects of social welfare programs on social media, which the agency claimed created an appearance of bias. The agency fails to provide evidence that his comments were likely to spark legal action from legal advocacy groups and disrupt its operations. The parties are ordered to draw up plans regarding the officer's reinstatement.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Korman, Filed On: May 29, 2024, Case #: 1:16cv5060, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Chun declines to dismiss the school faculty member's retaliation claim in his complaint alleging that the university president wrongfully fired the faculty member for putting a statement in his class syllabus, emails and outside his faculty office door about the Coast Salish tribe's claim to land that read, "I acknowledge that by the labor theory of property the Coast Salish people can claim historical ownership of almost none of the land currently occupied by the University of Washington." The school faculty member plausibly alleges a First Amendment retaliation claim as his speech “related to scholarship or teaching." While the university and its president cite the "Johnson v. Poway Unified School District" decision that allows discipline of speech on school grounds, that case's analysis focuses on secondary school education, not college education.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Chun, Filed On: May 3, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv964, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Education, employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Urias denies, in part, the sheriff's department's motion to dismiss, ruling the detective's allegations of frivolous disciplinary write-ups and a demotion after he reported misconduct by several coworkers and the undersheriff are sufficient to support his claim for violations of the New Mexico Whistleblower Protection Act. However, even though the detective's reports of misconduct qualify as protected speech, his First Amendment retaliation claim must be dismissed because he fails to show how any of the individual defendants violated his free speech rights.
Court: USDC New Mexico, Judge: Urias, Filed On: April 15, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv355, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Evidence, employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Roman finds for the city on an employee's claims she was fired for advocating for anti-racist policies. In the employee's capacity as city planner, she repeatedly attempted to include language to encourage the identification of "anti-racist" strategies for fair housing and economic development, but her supervisor repeatedly removed the word "anti-racist" on the basis that it would alienate some members of the community. The evidence overwhelmingly shows that the employee's speech was made pursuant to her job as a city planner, so it is not protected by the First Amendment.
Court: USDC Southern District of New York, Judge: Roman, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: 7:21cv4009, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Retaliation, first Amendment
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Dooley grants the employer's motion to dismiss, ruling the fired nurse's First Amendment retaliation claim fails as a matter of law because her speaking out to request extended stay in the medical facility for a homeless individual clearly fell within the scope of her job responsibilities and, therefore, was not protected speech.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Dooley, Filed On: March 11, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv127, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Mannion grants summary judgment to a township and two of its town supervisors, who were sued by the police chief and two officers over a dispute considering traffic enforcement. The police said one supervisor, who rebuked them for not ticketing more tractor-trailers on the highway, overstepped his authority and attempted to order them around in retaliation for exercising their First Amendment rights to the irate supervisor. The police failed to show actionable retaliatory conduct, as the town board member’s comments amounted to immature criticism and mere rudeness, and he had no authority to compel the officers to act.
Court: USDC Middle District of Pennsylvania, Judge: Mannion, Filed On: March 1, 2024, Case #: 3:19-2115, NOS: Civil Rights - Habeas Corpus, Categories: Civil Rights, employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Hurd grants partial summary judgment to a group of Onondaga County sheriffs on a retired sergeant’s First Amendment retaliation claims, finding his allegations that he suffered retaliation after he reported several incidences of misconduct during his tenure, including allegations that a doctor at the Onondaga County Justice Center altered the records of an inmate who committed suicide, are wholly speculative.
Court: USDC Northern District of New York, Judge: Hurd, Filed On: February 28, 2024, Case #: 5:18cv1218, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Seeger denies the Cook County Sheriff’s Office’s motion to dismiss a former correction officer’s First Amendment and retaliatory termination claims. The former CO claims the office fired him because its leadership did not appreciate his wearing a “Sons of Anarchy” TV show patch to court, along with his badge, while attending the trial of the men who fatally shot his close friend, another Cook County sheriff. The office also did not appreciate that he got into a conflict with the State’s Attorney’s Office over a potential plea deal for the men, or that he publicly accused the actual Cook County Sheriff, Tom Dart, of committing domestic abuse. The sheriff’s office claims the CO violated its rules of conduct for employees, but the former CO claims the termination was retaliatory and violated his First Amendment rights. The court finds that factual disputes, and the sheriff office’s lack of sufficient argument against the former CO’s claims, make dismissal inappropriate.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Seeger, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: 1:22cv1406, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Retaliation, first Amendment, Police Misconduct
J. Kovner enters judgment in favor of the New York Police Department and a group of detectives on claims of false arrest, malicious prosecution and First Amendment retaliation stemming from criminal charges filed against a former officer for allegedly sexually abusing a 12-year-old girl. The court finds probable cause for the former officer’s arrest was sufficiently established following credible testimony provided by the alleged victim. The litigant also fails to provide enough evidence that would lead a jury to conclude that he was fired from the force after he filed a complaint with the city’s comptroller’s office and conducted an interview with a reporter.
Court: USDC Eastern District of New York, Judge: Koyner, Filed On: January 18, 2024, Case #: 1:21cv6133, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Retaliation, first Amendment, Police Misconduct
J. Meyer grants the town and its police chief's motion for summary judgment, ruling the police officer's grievances about shift practices were not a matter of public concern and, therefore, cannot constitute protected speech to support his First Amendment retaliation claim, which must be dismissed. Additionally, the comparators cited by the police officer cannot be used to support his employment claims because none of the officers had nearly as many disciplinary infractions or investigations on their record at the time the officer was fired for insubordination.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Meyer, Filed On: January 18, 2024, Case #: 3:21cv1663, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Calabrese grants the employer's motion for summary judgment, ruling the employee's First Amendment retaliation claims fail as a matter of law. Although the gender pay disparity issue involved a matter of public concern, she failed to raise it before the board of commissioners until a hearing when she expressed other frustrations with her supervisor that involved issues related only to their work relationship, a hearing that took place more than five months after the pay gap issue arose.
Court: USDC Northern District of Ohio, Judge: Calabrese, Filed On: January 16, 2024, Case #: 1:18cv522, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Government, employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Moore finds the lower court properly denied the university officials' motion for sovereign immunity on claims filed by the university police officer. Although suits against states are barred when they seek retrospective relief, the expungement of records sought by the officer is prospective relief and allows the suit to proceed. Meanwhile, the officials' request for qualified immunity on First Amendment retaliation claims was also properly denied because the interview given to local media about the university's handling of a sexual assault allegation involved a matter of public concern and was conducted outside the scope of his ordinary duties; therefore, it was protected speech. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Moore, Filed On: January 9, 2024, Case #: 22-2057, Categories: Immunity, employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Coleman partially denies Chicago’s motions to dismiss numerous civil rights claims brought by a city worker. The worker opposes Chicago’s Covid-19 vaccine mandate for city employees and refused to get it on religious freedom grounds, despite contracting Covid-19 in September 2020 and being hospitalized for nine days. The city denied his request for a religious exemption and, when he still refused the vaccine, was eventually put on “no pay status.” After reviewing the case, the court dismisses the employee’s 14th Amendment and Illinois Health Care Right of Conscience
Act claims, but allows his First Amendment, Illinois Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Illinois Human Rights Act and Title VII claims to stand.
Court: USDC Northern District of Illinois, Judge: Coleman, Filed On: January 2, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv650, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Discrimination, employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Mannion allows a school administrator to pursue first amendment claims accusing the district of scapegoating her as a criminal suspect after another teacher disbursed a list of sensitive personal information belonging to other administrators, which included her own "salaries, raises, and social security number," because the administrator's bargaining activities and her political endorsement of a school board candidate constituted protected speech pertinent to public concern.
Court: USDC Middle District of Pennsylvania, Judge: Mannion, Filed On: September 30, 2023, Case #: 3:23cv278, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment, employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Hendrix denies, in part, a school district's motion to dismiss a former 5th grade math teacher's retaliation action, in which she claims she was fired for exercising her right to free speech and association when she posted comments about the district's post-Covid-19 mask policies. She sufficiently alleges her claims for her First Amendment retaliation claims.
Court: USDC Northern District of Texas , Judge: Hendrix, Filed On: September 27, 2023, Case #: 1:22cv170, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Education, employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Saylor partially denies a city’s motion for summary judgment against a former police detective suing it for allegedly violating his First, Fifth and 14th Amendment constitutional rights and some state laws by terminating his employment after he complained about corruption in the city’s police department. The former detective’s complaint occurred after it was recommended that he be terminated, but the actual decision to terminate him came after he wrote a series of letters accusing the individual who discharged him of unethical behavior, and that decision was made without the normal amount of interviewing of relevant witnesses.
Court: USDC Massachusetts, Judge: Saylor, Filed On: August 28, 2023, Case #: 1:21cv10867, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: employment Retaliation, first Amendment, Police Misconduct
J. Sharpe preserves First Amendment and equal protection retaliation claims brought by a female former special counsel of the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services against her supervisor. She alleges her supervision demoted her in retaliation for voluntary testimony she provided in an investigation into complaints that he was acting inappropriately towards female employees. The court finds her testimony relate to matters of the state and is therefore protected speech under the First Amendment. As well, the court finds the supervisor’s defenses for her demotion are undercut by allegations that parts of her testimony were corroborated by other employees, which could lead a jury to believe the reasons were pretextual and that her demotion was retaliatory.
Court: USDC Northern District of New York, Judge: Sharpe, Filed On: August 25, 2023, Case #: 1:18cv619, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Equal Protection, employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Underhill denies, in part, the revenue department employees' motion to dismiss, ruling proof of an injury to one's marital relationship is not required to bring a plausible claim for infringement of the right to familial association, and so the husband's claim of retaliation stemming from the termination of his wife after he provided legislative testimony critical of the department may proceed.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Underhill, Filed On: August 21, 2023, Case #: 3:21cv1372, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Government, employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Bolden denies, in part, the city and its police chief's motions for summary judgment, ruling the fired officers' attendance at a rally in support of their efforts to reopen the station during the Covid-19 pandemic constitutes First Amendment protected activity and is sufficient to state a plausible retaliation claim, given the proximity between the rally and their terminations. Furthermore, their defamation claims will proceed. Although the termination letters of the officers were public records and, therefore, could be disclosed to the media, the statements made by the chief during press conferences - specifically, that they were fired for "not doing their jobs" and for misconduct - are statements of fact that could be proved objectively false by the officers.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Bolden, Filed On: August 18, 2023, Case #: 3:21cv787, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Shea grants the employer's motion to dismiss, ruling the employee's allegations of aggressive language and the raised voice used by his manager before his termination do not support his claim of wrongful termination. Furthermore, he never complained about the workplace environment to anyone outside of the company, while it was also not a matter of public concern, which prevents him from bringing a First Amendment claim.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Shea, Filed On: July 27, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv1005, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Thacker finds the lower court properly dismissed the professor's claim alleging he suffered adverse employment action in retaliation for unpopular protected speech. The professor allegedly insulted a colleague for suggesting adding a question on diversity into a student survey, insulted another colleague for taking shortcuts in hiring a Black employee, and criticize a scholarly convention many of his colleagues and students attended for becoming too "woke." However, he failed to allege a causal connection between the incidents and the alleged adverse employment action. Affirmed.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: Thacker, Filed On: July 6, 2023, Case #: 22-1712, Categories: Education, employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Kirsch finds that the lower court found for the defendant deputies in an employment retaliation suit alleging the plaintiff deputy was retaliated against after announcing his candidacy for Sheriff. After his announcement, officials discovered he had failed to disclose on his application to become a deputy that he had been charged with criminal sexual assault 8 years prior. The First Amendment does not protect a candidate from public office from criticism, even in the form of condemnation. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Kirsch, Filed On: June 26, 2023, Case #: 21-3394, Categories: employment Retaliation, first Amendment
J. Williamowksi finds the lower court properly found for an employer on a worker's discimination and retaliation claims. The 20-week gap between the employee's reporting of racially charged comments by several of her subordinates, including that she acted like a "slave owner," and her termination prevents her from proving the causation element of her retaliation claim. Furthermore, there is no legal precedent in Ohio courts to allow the employee to base her wrongful termination claim on alleged violations of her Free Speech rights following her posting of a racist picture on Facebook. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Williamowski, Filed On: June 20, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-2021, Categories: employment Retaliation, first Amendment