In Gregg v. City of Houston, a Texas police officer prevailed on a motion to dismiss his claims for harassment and retaliation after he was sexually harassed by a female coworker for several years, and then ostracized by coworkers after he reported the harassment. The court found that Officer Michael Gregg met each of the required elements to proceed to trial on his Title VII hostile work environment claim and his retaliation claim.
In Brady v. Tamburini, a Rhode Island police detective prevailed in his First Amendment free speech lawsuit after being disciplined for speaking with the news media. The court found that the police department’s policy prohibiting officers from speaking to the media ran afoul of First Amendment free speech protections. It also found that several other department policies, for which Detective James Brady was disciplined, were improper as applied to him.
In Cobsy v. City of Indianapolis, a federal court dismissed the lawsuit of a police officer who claimed that his repeated discipline was motivated by racial bias in the Indianapolis Police Department. Because Officer Cosby did not present evidence that his multiple suspensions were related to his race, he could not state a claim for racial discrimination.
In Jones v. City of Birmingham, a federal court ruled that an Alabama Police Officer had alleged sufficient facts to show he may have been transferred as retaliation for filing a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The Court dismissed Edwin Jones’ claim for racial discrimination, but it did find that Jones had shown a potential retaliation for his filing a complaint with the EEOC. As a result, the Court determined that his case should be heard by a jury.
In Roy v. Correct Care Solutions, the U.S. Court of Appeals overturned the decision of a lower court and determined that Tara Roy had presented sufficient evidence that she faced gender discrimination and hostility to bring her case for employment discrimination before a jury. Roy’s case involved many defendants, including the private company that employed her (Correct Care), the Maine Department of Corrections, and the individual supervisors who allegedly retaliated against her for complaining about sexual harassment.
In Carey v. Throwe, a federal court determined that misleading statements made by former colleagues and supervisors of a police officer were not retaliation for exercise of his First Amendment rights, because his comments were not protected by the First Amendment. Because Norris Carey’s statements were not about a “matter of public concern” they were not protected, and therefore he was not a victim of unlawful retaliation. His lawsuit was dismissed by the Court.
In Helget v. City of Hays, a former administrative secretary to a police department claimed that her First Amendment rights were violated after she was terminated for testifying about confidential information. The department argued that the speech was not protected because it did not touch on a matter in the public interest and it disrupted department functions. The Tenth Circuit Court agreed and dismissed the administrative secretary’s claims.
In Billioni v. Bryant, the U.S. Court of Appeals found that a trial court had applied an incorrect legal standard to an Officer’s claim that his First Amendment right to free speech had been violated. Billioni was an employee of the York County Detention Center who discussed video footage of the alleged beating of a detainee with the press. When he was fired for doing so, he filed a lawsuit claiming he had a right under the First Amendment to bring this information to the public. This raised complex legal issues, and the U.S. Court of Appeals issued a narrow ruling regarding the test for when a government employee may share confidential information that may be of concern to the public. Billioni’s lawsuit will therefore continue in a lower court.
In Itzhaki v. Port Auth. of N.Y & N.J., a port authority public safety officer claimed that she was discriminated against on the basis of an injury sustained at work. The officer alleged that she would have been promoted to sergeant but for her injury. The Port Authority moved for summary judgement and argued that her injury precluded her from being on the job and therefore that she couldn’t perform the essential functions of the job. The U.S. Federal Court for the Southern District of New York agreed and granted the Port Authority’s motion.
In Hollant v. City of North Miami, a federal court in Florida ruled that an officer who was fired for alleged misconduct may continue with a lawsuit arguing that his termination violated his constitutional rights. Following an officer-involved shooting, Hollant was falsely accused of falsifying records by another Officer, and later by a City Councilman. Despite the fact that Hollant was not the Officer who shot someone, he was then moved into a pre-disciplinary proceeding. He was not allowed to cross-examine witnesses against him, and he alleged he was not given an opportunity to clear his name. The Court determined that Hollant had brought forward enough facts showing that he was denied due process of law, and that therefore he could sue the City and many of his supervisors.
