Shands v. City of Kennett case brief summary
993 F.2d 1337 (1993)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Plaintiff volunteer firemen appealed
the decision of the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Missouri, which entered a judgment notwithstanding the
verdict in favor of defendants, city and several city officials, in
their 42 U.S.C.S. § 1983 action.
CASE FACTS
Plaintiff volunteer firemen were dismissed from their positions after speaking to a city councilman about fire department matters. Plaintiffs brought the action against defendants, city and city officials, alleging that they had been discharged in retaliation for exercising their right to free speech under U.S. Const. amend I and that defendants had deprived them of a U.S. Const. amend. XIV liberty interest without due process of law. At the conclusion of the trial, the jury returned verdicts in favor of all plaintiffs and against all defendants on both counts. The district court granted judgment notwithstanding the verdict on both counts in favor of defendants.
DISCUSSION
The court affirmed the decision of the district court granting judgment not withstanding the verdict in favor of defendants, city and city officials because plaintiff volunteer firemen's speech, under the facts of this case, was not protected by the FirstAmendment and the district court did not err in granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the procedural due process claim.
Recommended Supplements for Administrative Law Examples & Explanations: Administrative Law, Fourth Edition
Administrative Law and Process: In a Nutshell (Nutshell Series)
993 F.2d 1337 (1993)
CASE SYNOPSIS
CASE FACTS
Plaintiff volunteer firemen were dismissed from their positions after speaking to a city councilman about fire department matters. Plaintiffs brought the action against defendants, city and city officials, alleging that they had been discharged in retaliation for exercising their right to free speech under U.S. Const. amend I and that defendants had deprived them of a U.S. Const. amend. XIV liberty interest without due process of law. At the conclusion of the trial, the jury returned verdicts in favor of all plaintiffs and against all defendants on both counts. The district court granted judgment notwithstanding the verdict on both counts in favor of defendants.
DISCUSSION
- The court analyzed the speech according to six factors and found that the interests of defendants, in promoting the efficiency of the public services it performed through its employees, outweighed the interests of plaintiffs, as citizens, in commenting upon matters of public concern.
- The court also found that plaintiffs' statements did not create the level of stigma required to implicate a constitutionally protected liberty interest.
- The court affirmed the decision of the district court.
The court affirmed the decision of the district court granting judgment not withstanding the verdict in favor of defendants, city and city officials because plaintiff volunteer firemen's speech, under the facts of this case, was not protected by the FirstAmendment and the district court did not err in granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the procedural due process claim.
Recommended Supplements for Administrative Law Examples & Explanations: Administrative Law, Fourth Edition
Administrative Law and Process: In a Nutshell (Nutshell Series)
No comments:
Post a Comment