United States Fourth Circuit

Reset A A Font size: Print

Bland v. Roberts, 12-1671

Summary judgment for defendant-sheriff in an action against defendant in his individual and official capacity, alleging that defendant retaliated against plaintiffs in violation of their First Amendment rights by choosing not to reappoint them because of their support of his electoral opponent, is: 1) affirmed in part, as to the claims of plaintiffs Sandhofer, Woodward, and Bland, where the district court properly analyzed the merits of their claims; 2) reversed in part, as to the claims of plaintiffs Carter, McCoy, and Dixon, where the district court erred by concluding that plaintiffs failed to create a genuine dispute of material fact regarding whether the Sheriff violated their First Amendment rights; 3) affirmed in part, where defendant was entitled to qualified immunity on Carter's, McCoy's, and Dixon's claims seeking money damages against the Sheriff in his individual capacity and Eleventh Amendment immunity against those claims to the extent they seek monetary relief against him in his official capacity; but 4) reversed in part, where defendant is not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity on Carter's, McCoy's, and Dixon's claims to the extent the remedy sought is reinstatement. (Amended Opinion)

Appellate Information

  • Decided 09/23/2013
  • Published 09/23/2013




  • United States Fourth Circuit


Copied to clipboard