Rendish

Rendish v. City of Tacoma

Good Law
123 F.3d 1216·1997 WL 471877
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 20, 1997No. 96-36150California5,079 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Trott, J.

OVERVIEW

Kimberly Rendish appeals the district court’s denial of her motion for a preliminary injunction. Rendish seeks reinstatement to her position as an Assistant City Attorney pending the outcome of her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit against the City of Tacoma-her former employer-and various City officials. In her suit, she alleges that the City violated her constitutional right of access to the courts by terminating her in retaliation for filing a lawsuit in state court. The district court denied the injunction, concluding that Rendish failed to make a sufficient showing of a likelihood of success on the merits and that she failed to demonstrate irreparable harm.

In order to receive constitutional protection, a public employee’s litigation, like her speech, must involve a matter of public concern, and her interest in the suit must outweigh the government’s interest in preventing disruption to its efficient delivery of services to the public. Although Rendish’s state court lawsuit does involve matters of public concern, the City’s interest in the effective and efficient fulfillment of its public responsibilities outweighs Rendish’s interests in pursuing the litigation.…

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.