United States Tenth Circuit

In an action brought by a university employee, terminated for alleged fiscal misconduct, raising a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 claim that he was denied his liberty interest under the Due Process Clause by defendants' dissemination of a report without providing him a name-clearing hearing, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed in part as to individual defendants but reversed as to the university defendants where there were material fact issues in dispute regarding the falsity of the charge of fiscal misconduct.

Appellate Information

• Decided 12/13/2007
• Published 12/14/2007

Judges

• HARTZ, Circuit Judge., Before MURPHY, HARTZ, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Tenth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Nora Kelly, Denver, CO, for Plaintiff-Appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Sonja McKenzie, Senter, Goldfarb & Rice, L.L.C., David Temple, Associate University Counsel, University of Colorado, (Thomas S. Rice and Elliot J. Scott of Senter, Goldfarb & Rice, L.L.C. and Patrick T. O'Rourke, Associate University Counsel, University of Colorado, with them on the brief), Denver, CO, for Defendants-Appellees.