Civil Rights — qualified immunity — public employment — freedom of speech

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Civil

Civil Rights — qualified immunity — public employment — freedom of speech

Where a government employee alleges he was terminated in retaliation for testifying against his supervisory, the district court erred in granting summary judgment to the defendant.

“Our opinion in Morales v. Jones, 494 F.3d 590 (7th Cir. 2007), has much greater bearing on this case. There, a Milwaukee police officer alleged that he was transferred to night?shift patrol duty after being deposed pursuant to a subpoena in a civil suit brought by a fellow officer against the Chief of Police. Id. at 598. We concluded that ‘being deposed in a civil suit pursuant to a subpoena was unquestionably not one of Morales’ job duties because it was not part of what he was employed to do.’ Id.; accord Karl v. City of Mountlake Terrace, 378 F.3d 1062 (9th Cir. 2012); Reilly v. City of Atlantic City, 532 F.3d 216, 220 (3d Cir. 2008). But see Huppert, 574 F.3d at 707. Like Chrzanowski, Morales undoubtedly had a professional obligation (not to mention a personal obligation) to comply with the subpoena, but this did not somehow convert his deposition testimony into speech ‘made pursuant to official duties.’ Defendants point out that Morales involved testimony in the civil context, whereas this case involves testimony in criminal proceedings, but this is a distinction without a difference: providing eyewitness testimony regarding potential wrongdoing, civil or criminal, was never ‘part of what [Chrzanowski] was employed to do.’ Chrzanowski’s rights were clearly established at all relevant times.”

Reversed and Remanded.

12-2811 Chrzanowski v. Bianchi

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Reinhard, J., Wood, J.