Ledford v. Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections

Good Law
658 F. App'x 312
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 9, 201614-35185California1,019 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Sharon Harrigfeld, Director of the Idaho Department of Juvenile Corrections (“IDJC”), and former IDJC Superintendent Betty Grimm (together, “Defendants”) appeal the district court’s denial of summary judgment based- on qualified immunity. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . An official is entitled to qualified immunity if her “conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 231 , 129 S.Ct. 808 , 172 L.Ed.2d 565 (2009) (citation omitted). We review a denial of qualified immunity de novo, Bryan v. MacPherson, 630 F.3d 805, 823 (9th Cir. 2010), and we reverse.

The ten plaintiffs, current and former IDJC employees, allege that Defendants retaliated against them for reporting corrupt practices at the IDJC, in violation of the First Amendment. In determining whether a public employer violated the First Amendment rights of an employee, courts must “seek ‘a balance between the interests of the [employee], as a citizen, in commenting upon matters of public concern and the interest of the State, as an employer, in promoting the efficiency of the public…

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.