59 results for 'cat:"Employment" AND cat:"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. Nachmanoff grants the hospital's motion for summary judgment. The employee claimed the hospital's the COVID-19 vaccination requirement violated his religious beliefs concerning abortion, which prevent him from taking any product developed or tested using aborted fetal cell lines. However, the hospital had approved use of the Novavax vaccine that does not contain fetal cell lines.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Virginia, Judge: Nachmanoff, Filed On: April 15, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv132, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Covid-19, employment Discrimination, 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. 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
J. St. Eve finds that the court lacks jurisdiction to hear the school's appeal of the lower court's order denying its motion to dismiss a sex discrimination suit on the basis of church autonomy. The lower court has not issued a conclusive decision on the school's church-autonomy defense, and did not second-guess the school's determination that the teacher was not in doctrinal good standing. Rather, the viability of the school's defense depends on the strength of the teacher's allegations related to pretext.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: St. Eve, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: 21-2683, Categories: Jurisdiction, employment Discrimination, first Amendment
J. Dooley denies the supervisor's motion to dismiss, ruling the fired employee has established a First Amendment retaliation claim. Although comments about the treatment of a homeless individual at the coworkers' medical clinic were part of the employee's job duties, she was not a public employee and, therefore, her speech was protected.
Court: USDC Connecticut, Judge: Dooley, Filed On: March 14, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv127, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: employment, first Amendment
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. Grasz finds a lower court properly denied a Mayor and a board of Alderman's motion for summary judgment concerning the termination of two police officers who filed grievances against a police chief for failing to maintain department vehicles and radar equipment. The Mayor and the Alderman argued that they are protected by qualified immunity on the police officers' First Amendment retaliation claims. However, the police officers sufficiently showed in court that they are entitled to relief for making public concern statements outside of their duties as police officers. Affirmed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Grasz, Filed On: March 4, 2024, Case #: 22-3668, Categories: employment, Immunity, 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. Barrett denies the judge's motion for judgment as a matter of law, ruling the jury's split verdicts on the employee's Equal Protection and First Amendment claims are not inconsistent. Evidence allowed the jury to conclude the employee's termination, which came immediately after she requested time off for the Jewish high holidays, was a direct result of the request but not solely because of her religious beliefs. Meanwhile, the employee's voluntary resignation from a subsequent position requires the award of back pay be reduced by $20,000, while her failure to prove any evil intent on the part of the judge prevented an award of punitive damages, and so that $35,000 award will also be vacated.
Court: USDC Southern District of Ohio, Judge: Barrett, Filed On: February 29, 2024, Case #: 1:17cv305, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment, Damages, 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. Tunheim partially grants the university and its employees' motion to dismiss the former employee's suit alleging a pattern of race, gender and age discrimination and harassment. The university's status as a religious institution and its mission statements and Declaration of Christian Community are not sufficient on their own for its employees' conduct to fall under the ministerial exception to employment-discrimination claims at this stage of litigation. The doctrine of laches is similarly insufficient to dismiss the former employee's case at this stage, since the facts as pleaded suggest that the employee's action was initiated within a reasonable timeline. Two voluntarily-waived claims are dismissed.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: February 7, 2024, Case #: 0:23cv2199, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment, employment Discrimination, 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. Immergut dismisses some of the employees' claims alleging that the university wrongfully rejected their religious exemption to the Covid-19 vaccine requirement. The employees do not clearly establish a First Amendment right under the free exercise clause because three of the cases they cite are inapplicable while the others concern constitutional and statutory provisions other than the free exercise clause. The employees' Title VII claims alleging failure to accommodate and religious discrimination against the university will go forward because the university has not moved for their dismissal.
Court: USDC Oregon, Judge: Immergut, Filed On: January 29, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv1190, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment, Covid-19, first Amendment
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. McCafferty grants a former special education teacher’s first motion to amend her complaint, while denying her other motions and granting education officials’ motions to dismiss. The former teacher fails to state a plausible claim of civil conspiracy but she does have the opportunity to amend her complaint, with the caveat that her addendum must have specific factual allegations.
Court: USDC New Hampshire, Judge: McCafferty, Filed On: December 20, 2023, Case #: 1:23cv391, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Education, employment, first Amendment
J. Gutierrez finds in favor of the city against the former fire chief's complaint that the city violated his First Amendment rights by firing him for statements he made on a podcast about civil unrest, which coincided with a time of public outcry against the police following George Floyd's death three weeks prior. The former fire chief's statements reflected on the city and the fire department because he never indicated during the podcast or afterward that he spoke in his individual capacity, as he represented himself as "Fire Chief Daryn Drum."
Court: USDC Central District of California, Judge: Gutierrez, Filed On: December 12, 2023, Case #: 2:21cv8492, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, employment, first Amendment
J. Thurston denies, in part, a county and others’ motion to dismiss a former chief deputy’s First Amendment and wrongful termination claims arising from his termination after failing to be elected as sheriff. He has sufficiently alleged his claims and they were timely filed.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Thurston, Filed On: December 4, 2023, Case #: 1:20cv321, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: employment, employment Discrimination, first Amendment
J. Johnson grants the dismissal motions filed by the city and the police chief in this lawsuit brought by a former police officer who was allegedly terminated for certain social media posts that violated department rules. The posts at issue were made prior to his employment with the police department, and he contends in this suit that his First Amendment rights were violated by his termination. However, the city's interest "in maintaining a police force that instills public confidence" outweighs the former police officer's interest "in his protected speech."
Court: USDC Northern District of Oklahoma , Judge: Johnson, Filed On: November 21, 2023, Case #: 4:19cv538, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Civil Rights, employment Discrimination, first Amendment