Reinhold

Reinhold v. Elma City

Good Law
13 F. App'x 734
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 19, 2001No. 99-35937; D.C. No. CV-98-05334-RJBCalifornia692 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Appellant James Reinhold (“Reinhold”) alleges he was terminated in retaliation for exercising his constitutionally protected right of free speech (sending his letter about Chief of Police Ron Axtman to Mayor David Osgood) and right to petition for redress of grievances (filing his claim for overtime wages). Both claims were appropriately dismissed on summary judgment. A plaintiff alleging retaliatory termination in violation of his First Amendment rights must show that he engaged in protected speech, and that this speech was a substantial or motivating factor in his termination. Rendish v. City of Tacoma, 123 F.3d 1216, 1219 (9th Cir.1997). The claim for overtime wages was not protected speech because it raised an issue of personal interest, rather than a matter of public concern. Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138, 147 , 103 S.Ct. 1684 , 75 L.Ed.2d 708 (1983). The letter to May- or Osgood related to matters of public concern, thus warranting constitutional protection. Appellant cannot meet the second prong of the Rendish test, however, because he admitted that he was convinced that Axtman would have fired him even if he had never written the letter.

Appellant also…

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.