United States Ninth Circuit

In an action claiming that defendant city suspended plaintiff police officers in retaliation for engaging in constitutionally protected speech, summary judgment for defendant is affirmed where poor interpersonal relationships amongst coworkers that might hamper the work of a government office does not automatically transform speech on such issues into speech on a matter of public concern.

Appellate Information

• Argued 03/05/2009
• Decided 07/13/2009
• Published 07/13/2009

Judges

• Before:  DIARMUID F. O'SCANNLAIN, PAMELA ANN RYMER, and KIM McLANE WARDLAW, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Michael A. McGill, Lackie & Dammeier APC, Upland, CA, argued the cause for the plaintiffs-appellants and filed the briefs.


• For Appellees:
  
• James A. Odlum, Mundell, Odlum & Haws, LLP, San Bernardino, CA, argued the cause for the defendants-appellees and was on the brief.  James Penman, City Attorney's Office, San Bernardino, CA, was also on the brief.