00-3395 Hedrich v. Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System, et al.

Listen to this article

“Hedrich urges that she was stigmatized by the defendants’ statements that she did not meet Whitewater’s standards of scholarship. This inference can be drawn, however, from practically every denial of tenure or termination. ‘Labeling an employee as incompetent or otherwise unable to meet an employer’s expectations does not infringe the employee’s liberty.’ Head v. Chicago Sch. Reform Bd. of Trustees, 225 F.3d 794, 801 (7th Cir. 2000). Alternatively, Hedrich contends that she was stigmatized by the defendants’ claims that she did not submit the relevant documentation for consideration by the faculty. This, she argues, portrays her to be ‘a dolt.’ The district court found that no properly presented evidence could support the proposition that the defendants’ statements were false. See Strasburger v. Board of Education, 143 F.3d 351, 356 (7th Cir. 1998). Even assuming that Hedrich did present such evidence, however, these statements do not suggest the kind of moral turpitude or dishonesty that would give rise to a liberty interest claim.

“If Hedrich could identify stigmatizing statements made by her employer, she would then have to provide evidence that these were made public and that as a result it was ‘virtually impossible for [her] to find new employment in [her] chosen field.’ Head, 225 F.3d at 801. Hedrich cannot satisfy either of these requirements. The only evidence she points to is the fact that over three years she applied for seven academic jobs and was not hired. From this she believes that a reasonable jury could infer that the defendants were publicly defaming her and that it was virtually impossible for her to find an academic position. Anyone familiar with the academic job market knows that failing to receive a tenure track position after only seven applications is commonplace, even under the best of circumstances. There is also no question that once a person has been denied tenure, finding another academic position is considerably more difficult; failing on seven attempts in that case is not surprising.

Nonetheless, Hedrich’s evidence could not be construed by a trier of fact to show that the consequences of her tenure denial have been any more severe than any other professional’s failure to receive a desired promotion.”

Affirmed.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, Crabb, J., Diane P. Wood, J.