Tibbetts

Tibbetts v. Kulongoski

Good Law
567 F.3d 529·2009 WL 1492156·29 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 129·2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 11665
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 29, 200907-36067California4,431 words

Opinion

Opinion

Smith, J.

Defendant-Appellant Oregon Governor Theodore Kulongoski appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion for summary judgment on the ground of qualified immunity. Plaintiffs-Appellees, who are former employees of the State Accident Insurance Fund, brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , alleging, among other claims, that Governor Kulongoski violated their Fourteenth Amendment due process rights by making stigmatizing statements about them in two press releases without providing them name-clearing hearings.

Because the relevant parameters of a Fourteenth Amendment right to a name-clearing hearing were not clear at the time of the allegedly stigmatizing statements, we conclude that a reasonable official in the Governor’s position would not have been aware of his alleged obligation to provide Plaintiffs name-clearing hearings. We therefore reverse the district court and hold that Governor Kulongoski is entitled to qualified immunity in this suit.

Factual and Procedural Background

Plaintiffs Cecil Tibbetts and David Thurber (together, Plaintiffs) are former managerial employees of Defendant State Accident Insurance Fund Corporation (SAIF). SAIF is a part of the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.