United States Sixth Circuit

In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 suit arising after school officials confiscated an eighth grader's cell phone when it began ringing during a class session and then imposed a one-day, in-school suspension upon her, a district court's denial of a motion to dismiss a procedural due process claim is reversed as: 1) plaintiff's one-day in-school suspension does not implicate a property interest in public education; 2) the suspension did not trigger the protections of the Due Process Clause arising from a student's liberty interest in their reputation; and 3) in any event, a one day in-school suspension is a de minimis deprivation of property or liberty.

Appellate Information

• Argued 04/18/2007
• Decided 08/28/2007
• Published 08/28/2007

Judges

• Before: SUHRHEINRICH and GIBBONS, Circuit Judges;  HEYBURN, Chief District Judge.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:Winston N. Harless, Lewis, King, Krieg, Waldrop & Catron, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant.  Stephen E. Grauberger, John H. Lowe & Associates, Goodlettsville, Tennessee, for Appellees ON BRIEF:Winston N. Harless, Lewis, King, Krieg, Waldrop & Catron, Nashville, Tennessee, for Appellant.  Stephen E. Grauberger, John H. Lowe & Associates, Goodlettsville, Tennessee, for Appellees.