United States Ninth Circuit

In a 42 U.S.C. section 1983 action brought by a police officer alleging his salary increase was delayed in retaliation for the exercise of his First Amendment rights, district court's grant of summary judgment is affirmed in part and reversed in part where: 1) plaintiff's speech involved a matter of public concern; and 2) a jury could conclude that plaintiff's union activities and related speech were undertaken in his capacity as a private citizen; 3) the delay in plaintiff's pay increase constituted an adverse employment action; 4) plaintiff's speech was a substantial or motivating factor for the delay; and 5) the Chief of Police was not entitled to qualified immunity for causing the delay.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/22/2013
• Published 03/22/2013

Judges

• Wardlaw

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel