By Mitchel Wilson
In Ellins v. City of Sierra Madre, 35 IER Cases 432 (2013), the Ninth Court of Appeals remanded a case against the City of Sierre Madre for trial because the trial court dismissed it after it incorrectly concluded that Officer John Ellins did not qualify for first amendment protections.
By Mitchel Wilson
The Federal Third Circuit Court of Appeals in Montone v. City of Jersey City, reversed the District Court and allowed Officer Valerie Montone and male co-plaintiffs to bring political retaliation/first amendment claims to trial when the City froze all promotions to lieutenant despite a lieutenant shortage. The court concluded that a group of male co-plaintiffs eligible for promotion also had valid claims, even though they weren’t the direct target of the alleged misconduct. [Read more…]
By Anthony Rice
This article demonstrates how arbitrators might view similar free speech claims differently. In Elko County, a sergeant’s discussion about the sheriff’s proposed staff reorganization was allowed to circumvent the chain of command since the speech was protected by the First Amendment. However, in City of Wapakoneta, a fire captain’s speech was required to go up the chain of command because the speech was not protected.
By Anthony Rice
![Megaphone ]](https://www.nationalpoliceandfirelaborblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Megaphone-.jpg)
In Minnick v. County of Currituck, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed a firefighter’s First Amendment claim because there was no link between his speech and the “adverse employment action.” Although Firefighter Minnick had attempted to organize a union and had engaged in arguably protected speech by complaining about equipment and safety issues, the court found no proof that his speech was a “substantial factor” in his forced transfer and later discharge. [Read more…]
By Jim Cline
As we all know, “social media” are becoming prevalent. The ubiquity of the Internet and the rapid expansion of other social media such as Twitter and social media pages such as Facebook, create opportunities for communication of astonishing proportions. With that ability to communicate on a larger stage comes one very directly associated problem — the ability to say something incredibly stupid to a much greater number of people on that “larger stage.” Or as one law enforcement blogger described the problem — police agencies now need to develop policies to address the problems associated with “when stupid strikes.”
By Anthony Rice
In Pubentz, an FBI linguist’s First Amendment retaliation claim failed because the linguist’s comments, made during a work presentation at the Chicago FBI Office, were not made as a citizen on a matter of public concern. Moreover, even if the speech was made as a citizen and on a matter of public concern, the court held the government’s interest would outweigh the linguist’s in this scenario.
By Anthony Rice
In Smith v. County of Suffolk, the plaintiff Raymond Smith, a Suffolk County Police Lieutenant, failed to show a connection between his protected free speech and the adverse employment action. The court held that Smith’s First Amendment Retaliation claim failed because a jury could conclude Smith’s discipline was linked to repeated misuse of the employer’s computers and not his protected free speech. [Read more…]
By Anthony Rice
In Kristofek v. Village of Orland Hills, the court reversed a judgment dismissing an officer’s Free Speech Claim. The lower court held that the officer’s Free Speech Claim failed because it was based on a self-interest motive—protection from civil and criminal liability—and not on a matter of “public concern.” However, the appeals court reserved, holding that the officer’s motive, by itself, does not conclusively determine whether a public employee’s speech involves a matter of public concern and is thus protected.
By Anthony Rice
In De Le Garza, a First Amendment retaliation claim survived summary judgment when there was independent testimony that the Sheriff did not hire the plaintiff, the only candidate for School Resource Officer, because of the plaintiff’s political stance. [Read more…]
By David Worley
In Gawlas v. King, 34 IER Cases 1485 (3d Cir. 2013), the Federal Third Circuit upheld the dismissal of both retaliation and claim brought by a Pennsylvania police officer when there was no alleged causal connection between the complaining officer’s union position and political affiliations and the removal of the K9 unit to which he was assigned. The court also found no due process violation, finding no property interest in the K-9 position which offered no premium pay. [Read more…]
