February 8, 2019
By Loyd Willaford and Matt Baker
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.
Filed Under: Free Speech Rights
February 8, 2019
By Loyd Willaford and Clive Pontusson
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.
Filed Under: Free Speech Rights
February 8, 2019
By Loyd Willaford and Matt Baker
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.
Filed Under: Disability Discrimination
February 1, 2019
By Loyd Willaford and Clive Pontusson
In Addison v. Sumter County Sheriff’s Office, a federal court in South Carolina ruled that a Sheriff’s Deputy had provided enough evidence to show that her 3-day suspension may have been in retaliation for filing a complaint of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Even though the Sheriff’s Office argued that the time between her Complaint to the EEOC and her suspension for insubordination was too long to make a connection between the two events, the court disagreed and found that Addison’s case should be brought before a jury.
Filed Under: Discipline
January 22, 2019
By Loyd Willaford and Clive Pontusson
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.
Filed Under: Legal Rights
January 15, 2019
By Cynthia McNabb and Clive Pontusson
In Reeder v. Carter, a recruit with the Indiana State Patrol brought suit in federal district court alleging that he had been discriminated against on account of his disability. Dillon Reeder had begun the ISP Recruit Academy and performed well, but was diagnosed with Diabetes and had to be hospitalized. During his treatment, the State Patrol made efforts to accommodate his condition, including special meals and reduced physical activity. However, the Patrol believed that Reeder could not complete the training program. Further, Reeder did not complete all of the coursework as part of the training program while he was in the hospital and when he was released from the hospital but not allowed to perform full-duty physical activities. As a result, Reeder was dismissed from the Academy. He was given the option of attending the Academy the following year, and also given the option of accepting a civilian job with the Patrol as a dispatcher. Reeder refused both offers. He filed a lawsuit under the Americans with Disabilities Act, claiming that the State Patrol had not done enough to accommodate his condition. The court disagreed, and found that the Patrol had done everything required by the law to attempt to accommodate Reeder’s disability. The court therefore dismissed Reeder’s lawsuit.
Filed Under: Disability Discrimination
January 15, 2019
By Loyd Willaford and Matt Baker
In Sprague v. Spokane Valley Fire Dep't, a fire department captain was fired for sending emails to his coworkers containing Biblical themes and verses from scripture. The civil service commission upheld the firing as permissible. The fire department captain sued the department in court and appealed to the Washington Supreme Court. The court held that the state agency’s decision against the captain did not bar his lawsuit, and that the captain’s emails were protected by the First Amendment.
Filed Under: Free Speech Rights
January 15, 2019
By Loyd Willaford and Clive Pontusson
In Webb v. City of Eufaula, a federal court in Oklahoma ruled that a female employee had offered enough facts and evidence to bring her lawsuit for gender discrimination to trial. Candy Webb was the only woman employed as a Police Officer by the City of Eufaula, and was subjected to different standards of training and fitness than other Officers. She was fired by the Police Department and filed a lawsuit.
Filed Under: Gender/Pregnancy Discrimination
January 11, 2019
By Loyd Willaford and Clive Pontusson
In Barone v. City of Springfield, a Community Service Officer from Oregon sued her Police Department for violating her free speech rights. Despite the fact that Thelma Barone had been hired to handle complaints of racial profiling by the department, she was fired for speaking out about issues of racial discrimination. The federal Court of Appeals ruled that a last chance agreement offered by her employer was too restrictive, because it did not allow her to share information about the Police Department with the general public.
Filed Under: Constitutional Rights, Free Speech Rights
January 11, 2019
Federal Court Rules that City of Chicago did not Fail to Accommodate Psychologically Unfit Paramedic
By Cynthia McNabb and Clive Pontusson
In a case that was decided on summary judgment, the federal court for the Northern District of Illinois ruled that the City of Chicago did not fail to accommodate or discriminate against Plaintiff, a fire paramedic in violation of the Americans with Disability Act (ADA). Specifically, the Court ruled that the Plaintiff, a fire paramedic with chronic Bell’s palsy employed by the City of Chicago, had failed to show that discrimination was the cause of her being sent to three fit-for-duty evaluations and being placed on involuntary leave.
