Archives

Monday Morning Review: Local Governments in the Federal Appellate Courts

Posted in Monday Morning Review on October 20, 2014 By Kira Klatchko

Here are last week’s published decisions involving local governments:

Sixth Circuit

Cass v. City of Dayton, No. 13-4409 (Oct. 16, 2014): In 1983 action alleging that officer used excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment, the court affirmed summary judgment for defendants because officer’s conduct was objectively reasonable and did not violate Fourth Amendment.

Seventh Circuit

Swisher v. Porter County Sheriff’s Dept., No. 13-3602 (Oct. 15, 2014): The court reversed the judgment for defendants because Plaintiff, who brought 1983 action alleging he was denied proper medical care while he was a pretrial detainee, had no duty to exhaust administrative remedies at the jail because jail’s grievance procedure was not clear.

Ninth Circuit Continue reading →

Monday Morning Review: Local Governments in the Federal Appellate Courts

Posted in Monday Morning Review on August 27, 2014 By Kira Klatchko

Apologies that this edition is delayed. I was tied up with a significant filing for the past week. The courts were busy too. Here are the last two weeks’ published decisions involving local governments:

First Circuit

Penn v. Escorsio, No. 13-2309 (Aug. 22, 2014): The court affirmed the district court’s denial of qualified immunity at the summary judgment stage to corrections officers alleged to be deliberately indifferent to risk that detainee could commit suicide. The court found that the issues presented on appeal were purely factual, and the court had no jurisdiction to decide them on interlocutory appeal.

Second Circuit Continue reading →

Monday Morning Review: Local Governments in the Federal Appellate Courts

Posted in Monday Morning Review on February 24, 2014 By Kira Klatchko

Here are last week’s published decisions involving local governments:

Third Circuit

M.R. v. Ridley School District, No. 12-4137 (Feb. 20, 2014) (finding under Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act that for “stay put” period: (1) school district must reimburse parents for private-school costs even if parents do not file a claim for payment until after a court has ruled for the school; and (2) the parents’ right to interim funding extends through the time of judicial appeal.).

Fourth Circuit

Stevenson v. City of Seat Pleasant, No. 12-2047 (Feb. 21, 2014) (finding, inter alia, Continue reading →

Monday Morning Review: Local Governments in the Federal Appellate Courts

Posted in Uncategorized on February 17, 2014 By Kira Klatchko

Here are last week’s published decisions involving local governments:

Seventh Circuit

Wilson v. Cook County, No. 13-1464 (Feb. 10, 2014) (affirming summary judgment for County on equal-protection, due-process, and Title VII claims arising out of alleged sexual-harassment in the workplace).

Ninth Circuit

Retired Employees Association of Orange County, Inc. v. County of Orange, No. 12-56706 (Feb. 13, 2014) (affirming Continue reading →

Monday Morning Review: Local Governments in the Federal Appellate Courts

Posted in Monday Morning Review on January 13, 2014 By Kira Klatchko

Here are last week’s published decisions involving local governments. They include two unsuccessful due-process challenges — one to speed-camera programs, the other to booking fees:

Second Circuit

Matusick v. Erie County Water Authority, No. 11-1234 (Jan. 6, 2014) (upholding jury’s finding of liability against water authority arising out of “interference with employee’s intimate association” due to alleged verbal and physical harassment).

Fourth Circuit

Snider International Corp. v. Town of Forest Heights, No. 12-2490 (Jan. 7, 2014) (holding that Town did not violate procedural or substantive due process by issuing citations by mail under Town’s speed-camera program).

Seventh Circuit Continue reading →

Monday Morning Review: Local Governments in the Federal Appellate Courts

Posted in Monday Morning Review on December 23, 2013 By Kira Klatchko

Here are published decisions involving local governments from the federal appellate courts from December 16, 2013, through December 20, 2013:

Sixth Circuit

Hocker v. Pikeville City Police Dep’t, No. 13-5341 (Dec. 17, 2013) (affirming that no constitutional violation occurred in 42 U.S.C. 1983 action based on officers’ alleged use of excessive force).

Seventh Circuit

Fluker v. County of Kankakee, No. 13-2247 (Dec. 20, 2013) (affirming dismissal of suit against County and officers arising out of auto accident that occurred during transport of prisoner, under Prisoner Litigation Reform Act).

Eighth Circuit Continue reading →

Ninth Circuit: Officer Removed After Raising Safety Issues Does Not Have First Amendment Claim.

Posted in Case Notes on December 5, 2013 By Kira Klatchko

If a public employee reports departmental-safety concerns to his supervisor, and the employee is removed from duty for raising those concerns, does the employee have a viable First Amendment retaliation claim?

In Hagen v. City of Eugene, No. 12-35492 (Dec. 3, 2013), the Ninth Circuit ruled that a public employee did not have a viable First Amendment claim under the particular circumstances there. The court ruled that, viewing all the evidence in the light most favorable to the employee, he was speaking as a public employee, not a private citizen.

The case involved a City police officer, Brian Hagen, who noticed that members of his SWAT team were often firing their weapons accidentally and negigently. Hagen tried to make his concerns about the team “as public as possible” by sending e-mails and raising the issue in meetings. Eventually, Hagen was removed from the K-9 team.

Hagen claimed that the City and senior officers had retaliated against him for exercising his First Amendment rights. Continue reading →

Monday Morning Review: Local Governments in the Federal Appellate Courts

Posted in Monday Morning Review on November 25, 2013 By Kira Klatchko

Here are published decisions involving local governments from the federal appellate courts from November 18, 2013 through November 22, 2013:

First Circuit:

Easthampton Savings Bank v. City of Springfield, No. 12-1917 (Nov. 22, 2013) (certifying state-law questions regarding municipal ordinances addressing foreclosures to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court). See our coverage here.

Seventh Circuit:

Hamilton v. Village of Oak Lawn, No. 12-3174 (Nov. 20, 2013) (affirming dismissal of 1983 challenge based on alleged unlawful detention under Fourth Amendment).

Monday Morning Review: Local Governments in the Federal Appellate Courts

Posted in Monday Morning Review on November 18, 2013 By Kira Klatchko

Here are published decisions involving local governments from the federal appellate courts from November 11, 2013 through November 15, 2013:

First Circuit

Winslow v. Aroostook County, No. 13-1319 (Nov. 15, 2013) (finding Winslow is not a whistleblower under Maine Whistleblowers’ Protection Act).

Second Circuit

Lynch v. City of New York, No. 12-3089 (Nov. 15, 2013) (affirming summary judgment for NYPD in Fourth-Amendment challenge to City policy requiring breathalyzer test for any officer whose firearm discharge results in death or injury; testing under the policy is a reasonable “special needs” search).

Seventh Circuit

Union County v. MERSCORP, Inc., No. 13-1443 (Nov. 14, 2013) (in class action initiated by counties, determining that mortgages need not be recorded under Illinois statute).

D.C. Circuit

Johnson v. Muhammed, No. 11-5115 (Nov. 15, 2013) (affirming grant of summary judgment to D.C. government because it had no authority to prevent strip searches where officer was a federal official acting under color of federal law).

Monday Morning Review: Local Governments in the Federal Appellate Courts

Posted in Monday Morning Review on November 11, 2013 By Kira Klatchko

Here are published decisions involving local governments from the federal appellate courts from November 4, 2013 through November 8, 2013:

Seventh Circuit

Brumfield v. City of Chicago, No. 11-2265 (Nov. 6, 2013) (finding that Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act does not apply to public-employment discrimination claims). See our coverage here.
Balthazar v. City of Chicago, No. 12-3378 (Nov. 8, 2013) (affirming dismissal of 1983 action against officers for alleged unreasonable apartment search after mistaken opening of wrong apartment). See our coverage here.

Monday Morning Review: Local Governments in the Federal Appellate Courts

Posted in Monday Morning Review on November 4, 2013 By Kira Klatchko

Here are published decisions involving local governments from the federal appellate courts from October 28, 2013 through November 1, 2013:

6th Circuit

Hidden Village, LLC v. City of Lakewood, No. 12-3543 (Oct. 30, 2013) (finding that claim brought by apartment-complex owner that City and officials waged racially motivated harassment campaign against its tenants may proceed to trial).
Burgess v. Fischer, No. 12-4191 (Nov. 1, 2013) (holding that summary judgment for County and officers was only proper for certain of plaintiffs’ excessive force, failure to intervene, deliberate indifference, and municipal liability claims under 42 U.S.C. 1983).

7th Circuit

Eagle Cove Camp & Conference Inc. v. Town of Woodboro (Oct. 30, 2013) (affirming grant of summary judgment for Town in Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act claim that Town’s land-use regulations prohibited plaintiffs from running year-round Bible camp on residentially zoned property). See our coverage here.

9th Circuit

Armstrong v. Asselin, No. 10-35777 (Nov. 1, 2013) (determining that officers were entitled to qualified immunity for search arising out of officers’ review of allegedly indecent magazine).

A Supreme Court DIG, and a Lesson About Appellate Jurisdiction

Posted in Case Notes on October 18, 2013 By Kira Klatchko

The first significant case affecting local governments in this new Supreme Court term — Madigan v. Levin — ended poorly. The Court resolved the case with a DIG — the Court dismissed it as improvidently granted.

What went wrong? And what can we learn from it about appellate jurisdiction?

An Important Question

The case had all the hallmarks of a classic Supreme Court case.

The question presented was important. It asked whether when a state or local government employee alleges that his employer has discriminated against him because of his age, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”) provides his exclusive remedy, or whether he may also bring a claim under 42 U.S.C. 1983 because the discrimination violates the Constitution’s Equal-Protection Clause.

The question had divided the lower courts. The Seventh Circuit acknowledged that its holding — that the ADEA does not prevent the employee from bringing a Section 1983 claim — created a deep circuit split.

And it had far-reaching implications. It could literally impact every state and local government.

What Went Wrong?

So why would the Court, after granting cert. and hearing oral argument, suddenly change its mind and toss the case?

Continue reading →