PositionBrief Article

U.S. District Court


Bailer v. Taylor, 170 F.Supp.2d 466 (D.Del. 2001). A former internal affairs investigator for a state corrections department brought an action against corrections officials, alleging they had retaliated against him for exercising his First Amendment right to free speech and that he was constructively discharged by the officials' retaliatory conduct. The district court held that the investigator's speech regarding wrongdoing by corrections officers was entitled to First Amendment protection and that summary judgment for the officials was precluded by fact questions regarding the alleged retaliation and the circumstances of the investigator's termination. Officials had criticized the investigator's report following an inmate riot, telling him that it contained unsupported conclusions and was vague, and directing him to revise it. The investigator protested the order to revise the report but eventually did so because he feared for his job. The investigator eventually resigned from his position after allegedly be ing subjected to retaliatory actions. (Delaware Department of Corrections)

U.S. Appeals Court


Longstreet v. Illinois Dept. of Corrections 276 F.3d 379 (7th Cir. 2002). A female correctional center employee brought a Title VII action against a state corrections department and the center's warden, alleging sexual harassment and retaliation. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants and the employee appealed. The appeals court affirmed, finding that the department's response of reassigning a male employee after the plaintiff complained of a sexual harassment incident was not obviously unreasonable. According to the plaintiff, a male employee offered her money to perform sexual acts. The court did not find evidence of retaliation. (Joliet Correctional Center, Illinois)

U.S. Appeals Court


Nicholas v. Wallenstein, 266 F.3d 1083 (9th Cir. 2001). County jail employees who had participated in the restraint and removal of a prisoner who was suffering from a cocaine overdose brought a state court action under ss 1983 based on the public identification of them as the persons who had participated in the cell extraction. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants and the appeals court affirmed. The appeals court held that the employees did not show that the facility commander had acted with deliberate...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT