Mike Wellington v. Lane County

Good Law
460 F. App'x 690
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 5, 201110-36176California818 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Mike Wellington (‘Wellington”) appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to Lane County, Robert Rockstroh (“Rockstroh”), and William Fleenor (“Fleenor”) on his claims for deprivation of a protected liberty interest in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, failure to reinstate in violation of the Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) and Oregon Family Leave Act (“OFLA”), and discrimination in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and Oregon disability discrimination law. We affirm the district court’s summary judgment on Wellington’s § 1983 claim, and vacate and remand with respect to the remaining claims.

The district court properly concluded that Fleenor, Rockstroh, and Lane County were entitled to summary judgment on Wellington’s § 1983 claim. A liberty interest is implicated only if a contested public disclosure impugns an individual’s reputation for honesty or morality. Guzman v. Shewry, 552 F.3d 941, 955 (9th Cir.2009). Even assuming the statements made by Fleenor and Rockstroh were inaccurate or disclosed to the public, such pronouncements did not give rise to a protected liberty interest because they could not be reasonably…

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.